Any problems with this patch?

Any problems with this patch?

[David Kastrup]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 156 bytes --]


In order to get consistent treatment of local-map/keymap properties, I
would like to check in the following change.  Doese anybody see a
problem with it?


[-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --]
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/x-patch, Size: 1042 bytes --]

*** keyboard.c	11 Sep 2006 08:42:55 +0200	1.875
--- keyboard.c	11 Sep 2006 16:33:52 +0200	
***************
*** 9125,9140 ****
  			  if (!EQ (map_here, orig_local_map))
  			    {
  			      orig_local_map = map_here;
! 			      keybuf[t] = key;
! 			      mock_input = t + 1;
! 
! 			      goto replay_sequence;
  			    }
  			  map_here = get_local_map (XINT (pos),
  						     current_buffer, Qkeymap);
  			  if (!EQ (map_here, orig_keymap))
  			    {
  			      orig_keymap = map_here;
  			      keybuf[t] = key;
  			      mock_input = t + 1;
  
--- 9125,9143 ----
  			  if (!EQ (map_here, orig_local_map))
  			    {
  			      orig_local_map = map_here;
! 			      ++localized_local_map;
  			    }
+ 
  			  map_here = get_local_map (XINT (pos),
  						     current_buffer, Qkeymap);
  			  if (!EQ (map_here, orig_keymap))
  			    {
  			      orig_keymap = map_here;
+ 			      ++localized_local_map;
+ 			    }
+ 
+ 			  if (localized_local_map > 1)
+ 			    {
  			      keybuf[t] = key;
  			      mock_input = t + 1;
  

[-- Attachment #3: Type: text/plain, Size: 52 bytes --]



-- 
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum

[-- Attachment #4: Type: text/plain, Size: 142 bytes --]

_______________________________________________
Emacs-devel mailing list
Emacs-devel@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-devel

Re: Any problems with this patch?

[Richard Stallman]

    In order to get consistent treatment of local-map/keymap properties, I
    would like to check in the following change.

Would you please describe the intended change in behavior more
concretely?  Just saying it is "consistent" does not explain what the
behavior is.