From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Stefan Monnier Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Bikeshedding go! Why is unbound? Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2011 21:42:11 -0500 Message-ID: References: <87sjx7z7w4.fsf@telefonica.net> <83pqsbmf6j.fsf@gnu.org> <87k4ijz07h.fsf@telefonica.net> <2460D97DEA4047B3B9DF92C4A80981EF@us.oracle.com> <57BF13882D6E494286547F293FE9D03B@us.oracle.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1294886547 7622 80.91.229.12 (13 Jan 2011 02:42:27 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2011 02:42:27 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Stuart Hacking , =?iso-8859-1?Q?=D3scar?= Fuentes , Lennart Borgman , Drew Adams , emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Deniz Dogan Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu Jan 13 03:42:22 2011 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1PdD8l-0007Sq-Ad for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 13 Jan 2011 03:42:19 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:35600 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1PdD8k-0007fX-Qk for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 12 Jan 2011 21:42:18 -0500 Original-Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=49224 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1PdD8g-0007fQ-7S for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 12 Jan 2011 21:42:15 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1PdD8f-0003R9-5J for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 12 Jan 2011 21:42:14 -0500 Original-Received: from ironport2-out.teksavvy.com ([206.248.154.181]:2965 helo=ironport2-out.pppoe.ca) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1PdD8f-0003Qy-0r for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 12 Jan 2011 21:42:13 -0500 X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AsgPAAr1LU1FxIbi/2dsb2JhbACkNw10vCOFTASEaI4o X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.60,315,1291611600"; d="scan'208";a="87813154" Original-Received: from 69-196-134-226.dsl.teksavvy.com (HELO ceviche.home) ([69.196.134.226]) by ironport2-out.pppoe.ca with ESMTP/TLS/ADH-AES256-SHA; 12 Jan 2011 21:42:11 -0500 Original-Received: by ceviche.home (Postfix, from userid 20848) id 5FE23660BB; Wed, 12 Jan 2011 21:42:11 -0500 (EST) In-Reply-To: (Deniz Dogan's message of "Wed, 12 Jan 2011 21:42:38 +0100") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.0.50 (gnu/linux) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:134479 Archived-At: > The proposal was to bind M-f4 to save-buffers-kill-terminal or a > similar function on Windows installations only. I think handle-delete-frame would make more sense. > M-f4 is a standard keybinding in Windows and it normally does the same > thing as it does in Gnome and KDE, which is close the active window or > exit the current application. The problem is that when I hit M-f4 in > *Emacs* running on Windows, Emacs says that the key is undefined and > that's the end of that. > Right, but M-f4 doesn't "work" in Windows for a reason that is beyond > me, but which some people on here seem to understand. So now the question is indeed: how is M-f4's standard Windows behavior of closing the window expected to be implemented? Is it possible to globally (well, except for Emacs ;-) change this key to some other one? > This is where the idea of binding M-f4 in Emacs came up. Whether it's > a good one or a bad one, I don't know... Maybe binding it (in w32) to handle-delete-frame would be a good way to implement the expected behavior, indeed. But first, we need to know how it's normally implemented in standard confirming applications. Stefan