Re: Completion keys and rectangles

[David De La Harpe Golden <david@harpegolden.net>]

Per Starbäck wrote:
> M-TAB is very often used by the window manager. 

True, or at least M-<tab> is (what? See below),  but that's typically an 
easily reconfigured option in the window manager preferences (except on 
windows).   I move all common window manager meta+key operations to 
super+key anyway (which after all has a stylised window printed on it 
thanks to microsoft. Super isn't used by default emacs bindings as a 
matter of policy)

> What do you think is the best solution to the window mangers vs.
> completion in emacs problem? Would it be better if
> key-description described M-TAB as ESC TAB or C-M-i if there is reason
> to think M-TAB won't work?

M-TAB pretty much /is/ emacs saying M-C-i

A "real tab key only" binding  says "<tab>" instead of "TAB"

See manual Customization > Key Bindings > Named ASCII Chars
notes about TAB and C-i being the same thing.

I guess it may still not be obvious to modern users that therefore C-M-i 
is a direct alternative to M-TAB though.

try:
C-h c then C-i :
"TAB runs the command indent-for-tab-command"

C-h c then tab key :
"TAB (translated from <tab>) runs the command indent-for-tab-command"


> Would it be good to have an  alternative key for M-TAB? 

I tend to view C-M-i (M- C-i) /as/ the memorable alternative to M-TAB.

Showing my age I guess, but this was once something "everyone knew" in 
computing:

ASCII TAB = 9.   9 + 64 = 73. 73 = ASCII I
ASCII BS  = 8.   8 + 64 = 72. 72 = ASCII H
ASCII ESC = 27. 27 + 64 = 91. 91 = ASCII [

So, ^I for TAB, ^H for backspace, ^[ for escape etc.