From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Additional cleanup around xterm-mouse Date: Tue, 01 Dec 2020 20:23:07 +0200 Message-ID: <83mtyxgzck.fsf@gnu.org> References: <83o8jupnqd.fsf@gnu.org> <838savys2v.fsf@gnu.org> <3e3933d8ec1d5d3f6809385a8ac5f447@finder.org> <83mtz1moa5.fsf@gnu.org> <0ea60a4f2a7fb0698f84ac5957cafef3@finder.org> Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="37661"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Jared Finder Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Tue Dec 01 19:23:56 2020 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1kkAJg-0009iK-9Z for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Tue, 01 Dec 2020 19:23:56 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:53176 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kkAJf-00013j-5i for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Tue, 01 Dec 2020 13:23:55 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:54052) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kkAIx-0000bA-Oy for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 01 Dec 2020 13:23:11 -0500 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]:60372) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kkAIx-00035H-IP; Tue, 01 Dec 2020 13:23:11 -0500 Original-Received: from [176.228.60.248] (port=3633 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1kkAIw-0008Nr-O8; Tue, 01 Dec 2020 13:23:11 -0500 In-Reply-To: <0ea60a4f2a7fb0698f84ac5957cafef3@finder.org> (message from Jared Finder on Mon, 30 Nov 2020 23:36:23 -0800) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:260157 Archived-At: > Date: Mon, 30 Nov 2020 23:36:23 -0800 > From: Jared Finder > Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org > > This makes sense to me. I agree that read-key is likely to currently > behave different in some situations from read-event. Are these > differences bugs that should be fixed or are they now features that can > not be changed? I don't know. I think we need to discuss each difference separately. > I'm about 33% through analyzing read-key and have already found the > following differences: > > * read-key resets this-command-keys, read-event appends to it. > * read-key does not return switch-frame events as they happen, > read-event does. Thank you for doing this. We should at least document these changes in some place, and probably also discuss at least some of them. > Sounds good. I will modify my patch soon. Great, thanks.