From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Emanuel Berg Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: A TAB operation reform question. Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2022 12:25:21 +0200 Message-ID: <87bkqiwtbi.fsf@dataswamp.org> References: <87tu4blmf0.fsf@laptop.lockywolf.net> <87bkqjz0rj.fsf@dataswamp.org> <33111b02-476b-f2ff-33dc-4460ade2532d@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="4695"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Cancel-Lock: sha1:w56jd9QppmcZATfqH0JWtv0g5K8= Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Tue Oct 11 14:26:32 2022 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 1oiELA-0000xP-E8 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Tue, 11 Oct 2022 14:26:32 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:38170 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1oiEL8-00047j-L6 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Tue, 11 Oct 2022 08:26:30 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:54450) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1oiCSK-0000k0-Fw for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 11 Oct 2022 06:25:50 -0400 Original-Received: from ciao.gmane.io ([116.202.254.214]:35010) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1oiCSF-0003gi-Dc for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 11 Oct 2022 06:25:45 -0400 Original-Received: from list by ciao.gmane.io with local (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1oiCS0-00084E-PM for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 11 Oct 2022 12:25:28 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ Mail-Followup-To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Mail-Copies-To: never Received-SPF: pass client-ip=116.202.254.214; envelope-from=ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; helo=ciao.gmane.io X-Spam_score_int: -15 X-Spam_score: -1.6 X-Spam_bar: - X-Spam_report: (-1.6 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.25, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-Mailman-Approved-At: Tue, 11 Oct 2022 07:51:41 -0400 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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:297473 Archived-At: Thibaut Verron wrote: > If I understand correctly, the point of the suggested change > is to give a straightforward way for packages to implement > their wanted behavior at the tab key, all while making it easy > for users to prevent a complete hijack of the key. You save the original functions for the keymaps involved, then write your own function. Then write yet another function, a wrapper or interface, that branches according to some condition - either execute the original function for the current keymap, or execute the other, new function.. Then bind the wrapper/interface function to TAB. -- underground experts united https://dataswamp.org/~incal