Re: A simple implementation of context-sensitive keys

["Lennart Borgman (gmail)" <lennart.borgman@gmail.com>]

Stefan Monnier wrote:
>>> I hope we can do better than that, i.e. come up with a way to do
>>> something like what you proposed, but still have where-is, C-h k,
>>> etc... take it into account.
>> I am starting to wonder whether this is the right way to go.
> 
> I'm not sure it is either.
> 
>> There is no notion in where-is, C-h k, etc that there is any key binding
>> conflict. There is no easy way for users to reorder minor-mode-map-alist.
> 
> The problem is a lot more general than conflicts between minor modes.
> There are things also like mouse-2 bindings that only work locally
> (either implemented via `keymap' text-properties or by a normal binding
> that checks a predicate and delegates to some other command if that
> fails) where the various possible "conflicting" bindings can be spread
> between minor modes, major modes and global bindings.

Some of this potential conflicts are resolved by the key binding
conventions:

  (info "(elisp) Key Binding Conventions")

But there is nothing there that help for conflicts between minor modes.

The only thing I can think of that can help is giving some way to tell
which minor mode should come first, ie some priority handling.