Find bindings for all modes

Find bindings for all modes

[Tim Johnson]

I'm using emacs 24 on Mac OS X, console mode, macports install. 

When I do something like this
C-h c C-j

I am told that the binding for C-j is 
electric-newline-and-maybe-indent
in Fundamental mode.

But from *scratch* the binding is 
eval-print-last-sexp
in Lisp Interaction mode

Is there a way to find out all mode - specific bindings for a given
key sequence?

Thanks
-- 
Tim 
tim at tee jay forty nine dot com or akwebsoft dot com
http://www.akwebsoft.com, http://www.tj49.com

Re: Find bindings for all modes

[John Mastro]

Tim Johnson <tim@akwebsoft.com> wrote:
> Is there a way to find out all mode - specific bindings for a given
> key sequence?

I think it depends on what your intended use is. For instance, you could
do something like this:

    (defun bindings-for (key)
      (let ((seen nil)
            (bindings nil))
        (dolist (buffer (buffer-list))
          (with-current-buffer buffer
            (unless (memq major-mode seen)
              (push major-mode seen)
              (push (cons major-mode (key-binding key))
                    bindings))))
        bindings))

    (pp (bindings-for (kbd "C-j")))

This will show you an alist mapping major mode names to the command
bound to C-j in some active buffer of that mode.

Unfortunately, this is far from perfect. The binding could well be
associated with a minor mode rather than a major mode, but it shows the
major mode's name anyway. And different `foo-mode' buffers could have
different bindings for the same key, but it assumes they're all the
same.

I don't know a way to get a really definitive look at "what's bound
where by whom", but hopefully someone else will chime in.

-- 
john

Re: Find bindings for all modes

[Tim Johnson]

* John Mastro <john.b.mastro@gmail.com> [141028 13:54]:
> Tim Johnson <tim@akwebsoft.com> wrote:
> > Is there a way to find out all mode - specific bindings for a given
> > key sequence?
> 
> I think it depends on what your intended use is. For instance, you could
> do something like this:
 
   I'd like to use C-j as a prefix key. 
   Note: I have limited mobility in my hands and always have the
   control key to the left of my "A" key.

>     (defun bindings-for (key)
>       (let ((seen nil)
>             (bindings nil))
>         (dolist (buffer (buffer-list))
>           (with-current-buffer buffer
>             (unless (memq major-mode seen)
>               (push major-mode seen)
>               (push (cons major-mode (key-binding key))
>                     bindings))))
>         bindings))
> 
>     (pp (bindings-for (kbd "C-j")))
  This is very handy. Thank You! 

> This will show you an alist mapping major mode names to the command
> bound to C-j in some active buffer of that mode.
> 
> Unfortunately, this is far from perfect. The binding could well be
> associated with a minor mode rather than a major mode, but it shows the
> major mode's name anyway. And different `foo-mode' buffers could have
> different bindings for the same key, but it assumes they're all the
> same.
> 
> I don't know a way to get a really definitive look at "what's bound
> where by whom", but hopefully someone else will chime in.
  :) The more the merrier...
  thanks again
-- 
Tim 
tim at tee jay forty nine dot com or akwebsoft dot com
http://www.akwebsoft.com, http://www.tj49.com

Re: Find bindings for all modes

[John Mastro]

Tim Johnson <tim@akwebsoft.com> wrote:
>    I'd like to use C-j as a prefix key.
>    Note: I have limited mobility in my hands and always have the
>    control key to the left of my "A" key.

I wanted to do something similar in order to have a general-purpose
prefix key on the right hand side of the keyboard. (I strongly prefer to
use opposite hands for the modifier(s) and they keys themselves. So
`C-c` or `C-x r` are fine, but I'm not a big fan of e.g. `C-x o`. This
is primarily a "preference" thing, although I do think that using
opposite hands is more ergonomic than not).

What I settled on for now is to steal C-h. I actually use the help
commands quite a bit, but I find <f1> to be "good enough" for accessing
them.

If you don't mind, let us (the list) know what you settle on - I'm
always interested to hear about Emacs users' key binding innovations.

>   This is very handy. Thank You!

You're welcome! I'm glad it helped.

-- 
john

Re: Find bindings for all modes

[Tim Johnson]

* John Mastro <john.b.mastro@gmail.com> [141028 14:30]:
> Tim Johnson <tim@akwebsoft.com> wrote:
> >    I'd like to use C-j as a prefix key.
> >    Note: I have limited mobility in my hands and always have the
> >    control key to the left of my "A" key.
> 
> I wanted to do something similar in order to have a general-purpose
> prefix key on the right hand side of the keyboard. (I strongly prefer to
> use opposite hands for the modifier(s) and they keys themselves. So
> `C-c` or `C-x r` are fine, but I'm not a big fan of e.g. `C-x o`. This
> is primarily a "preference" thing, although I do think that using
> opposite hands is more ergonomic than not).
> 
> What I settled on for now is to steal C-h. I actually use the help
> commands quite a bit, but I find <f1> to be "good enough" for accessing
> them.

  I have done the same to use C-h for backward-delete

> If you don't mind, let us (the list) know what you settle on - I'm
> always interested to hear about Emacs users' key binding innovations.

  I've done considerable keybinding in the past, using emacs in gui
  mode on linux. So I've done considerable rewriting for OS X and
  terminal environment what follows is untested but should give an
  idea :

;; Could be a "template" for other rebindings
(defun tj-control-j ()
  "Function to call when control-j is rebound"
  (interactive)
  (cond
    ((string-equal mode-name "Lisp Interaction")
     (eval-print-last-sexp))
    (t
      (electric-newline-and-maybe-indent))))
;; set up the keymap
; Movement related bindings
(global-unset-key "\C-j")
(defvar tj-go-map (make-sparse-keymap) "Control-j")
(define-prefix-command 'tj-go-map)
(global-set-key "\C-j" 'tj-go-map)
;; rebind the original C-j
(define-key tj-go-map (kbd "j") 'tj-control-j)

No doubt there is going to be some glitches, but the next
few days will finish the story ...
cheers
-- 
Tim 
tim at tee jay forty nine dot com or akwebsoft dot com
http://www.akwebsoft.com, http://www.tj49.com

Re: Find bindings for all modes

[Robert Thorpe]

John Mastro <john.b.mastro@gmail.com> writes:

> Tim Johnson <tim@akwebsoft.com> wrote:
>>    I'd like to use C-j as a prefix key.
>>    Note: I have limited mobility in my hands and always have the
>>    control key to the left of my "A" key.
>
> I wanted to do something similar in order to have a general-purpose
> prefix key on the right hand side of the keyboard. (I strongly prefer to
> use opposite hands for the modifier(s) and they keys themselves. So
> `C-c` or `C-x r` are fine, but I'm not a big fan of e.g. `C-x o`.

I'm not sure I understand John Mastro & Tim Johnson are trying to
achieve here.  However, there are a few keys that are much less trouble
to use:

* C-' C-# C-. C-, C-; C-=.
Undefined by default.

* C--, C-1, C-2,..., M--, M-1, M-2, ....
These are duplicates.  If you like you can use one set of them and
redefine the other.  Notice that C-4 & M-4 are almost useless since
in most circumstances they do the same thing as C-u.

* M-o.
This isn't very useful unless you use enriched-mode.

* M-s.
The existing M-s prefix key doesn't have very much in it.  Eventually the
Emacs maintainers will put more in no-doubt, but until then you can put
a few things in it.

* C-c X.
This is left as the default user-defined prefix key.

Some of these don't work in terminals, I don't know which ones because I
don't use terminals.

BR,
Robert Thorpe

Re: Find bindings for all modes

[Tim Johnson]

* Robert Thorpe <rt@robertthorpeconsulting.com> [141029 07:11]:
> John Mastro <john.b.mastro@gmail.com> writes:
> 
> > Tim Johnson <tim@akwebsoft.com> wrote:
> >>    I'd like to use C-j as a prefix key.
> >>    Note: I have limited mobility in my hands and always have the
> >>    control key to the left of my "A" key.
> >
> > I wanted to do something similar in order to have a general-purpose
> > prefix key on the right hand side of the keyboard. (I strongly prefer to
> > use opposite hands for the modifier(s) and they keys themselves. So
> > `C-c` or `C-x r` are fine, but I'm not a big fan of e.g. `C-x o`.
> 
> I'm not sure I understand John Mastro & Tim Johnson are trying to
> achieve here.  However, there are a few keys that are much less trouble
> to use:
 Robert, I'll note several things first.
 1)I am new to terminal mode (need it for ssh connections to my main
 machine from netbooks)
 2)I have a limited knowledge of emacs.
 3)I do not work in a team environment
 4)I have limited movement in my hands and painful arthritis in my
 thumbs, thus I seek quick sequences and short reaches.
 Functionally, my hands are semi-crippled.
 5)I use a happy hacker keyboard on my mac, where the control key is
 in the same place as the caps lock on convention keyboards and I
 set up all my other computers with caps lock and control swapped.

> * C-' C-# C-. C-, C-; C-=.
> Undefined by default.
  These are not available in console mode in my OS and
  configuration in terminal mode.
  I used to use C-; as a prefix in gui mode and loved it!

> * C--, C-1, C-2,..., M--, M-1, M-2, ....
> These are duplicates.  If you like you can use one set of them and
> redefine the other.  Notice that C-4 & M-4 are almost useless since
> in most circumstances they do the same thing as C-u.
  C-digit sequences are not available in my configuration on this OS
  and terminal mode.

> * M-o.
  Yeah, I could use C-[ o
> This isn't very useful unless you use enriched-mode.
> 
> * M-s.
  Yeah, I could use C-[ s
> The existing M-s prefix key doesn't have very much in it.  Eventually the
> Emacs maintainers will put more in no-doubt, but until then you can put
> a few things in it.
  
> * C-c X.
> This is left as the default user-defined prefix key.
  I'm glad you brought that up. From 
  https://www.gnu.org/software/emacs/manual/html_node/elisp/Key-Binding-Conventions.html
  I didn't know that C-c x was available in that fashion. Thanks, a
  do you have URLs or Help for further docs on this?

> Some of these don't work in terminals, I don't know which ones because I
> don't use terminals.
  See above ... 
  I will (tentatively) be using C-j, C-l, C-o, C-s, C-t, C-u and C-]
  as prefix keys for keymaps. The original bindings (I hope) have
  been resolved. I realize that this is highly unorthodox but see
  note 4) and note 3) ...
  Because I'm using keymaps and prefix keys - alterations should be
  easy. Along with C-c x, I note the C-x j and C-x C-j are undefined
  in my setup. But, again, see note 4) ...
  If my hands were in the same shape as the rest of me, it would be
  a whole different story.

  Thanks for the tip on C-c x.
  cheers
-- 
Tim 
tim at tee jay forty nine dot com or akwebsoft dot com
http://www.akwebsoft.com, http://www.tj49.com

Re: Find bindings for all modes

[John Mastro]

Robert Thorpe <rt@robertthorpeconsulting.com> wrote:
> I'm not sure I understand John Mastro & Tim Johnson are trying to
> achieve here.  However, there are a few keys that are much less trouble
> to use:

Fair warning - this will probably be of interest to approximately noone,
but I'll share my thinking anyway :)

My goal is to have a general-purpose prefix key on the right hand side
of the keyboard, to complement C-c.

> * C-' C-# C-. C-, C-; C-=.
> Undefined by default.

Besides the problem with terminals, there's a sense in which unbound
keys are less attractive for my purpose than using C-h. Keys that are
unbound by default are an understandably attractive option for mode
authors. On the other hand, no mode that I know of rebinds C-h, so I
only deal with the issue once. Also, these are all either pinky keys,
off the home row, or both.

> * C--, C-1, C-2,..., M--, M-1, M-2, ....
> These are duplicates.  If you like you can use one set of them and
> redefine the other.  Notice that C-4 & M-4 are almost useless since
> in most circumstances they do the same thing as C-u.

I like having numeric args on both control and meta. I can see the case
for {C,M}-4 (although there are counter-examples) but I find the idea of
treating 4 differently a bit ugly. Also, they're off the home row.

> * M-o.
> This isn't very useful unless you use enriched-mode.

Indeed, I use M-o for `ace-window' (an `other-window' replacement).

> * M-s.
> The existing M-s prefix key doesn't have very much in it.  Eventually the
> Emacs maintainers will put more in no-doubt, but until then you can put
> a few things in it.

This is on the left hand side of the keyboard, whereas I want something
on the right. As you point out, we already have C-c on the left.

> * C-c X.
> This is left as the default user-defined prefix key.

I use this a lot and am happy with it for many things, though not all. I
want a prefix key on the right to complement C-c, not to replace it.

> Some of these don't work in terminals, I don't know which ones because I
> don't use terminals.

I do use terminals regularly, but I still haven't managed to memorize
all the differences and at least once a week I manage to surprise myself
when something doesn't work.

-- 
john

Re: Find bindings for all modes

[Tim Johnson]

* John Mastro <john.b.mastro@gmail.com> [141029 15:08]:
> Robert Thorpe <rt@robertthorpeconsulting.com> wrote:
> > I'm not sure I understand John Mastro & Tim Johnson are trying to
> > achieve here.  However, there are a few keys that are much less trouble
> > to use:
> 
> Fair warning - this will probably be of interest to approximately noone,
> but I'll share my thinking anyway :)
> 
> My goal is to have a general-purpose prefix key on the right hand side
> of the keyboard, to complement C-c.
  C-c ; is available
  But, see
  https://www.gnu.org/software/emacs/manual/html_node/elisp/Key-Binding-Conventions.html
  and the following statement there :
  "Sequences consisting of C-c followed by {, }, <, >, : or ; are
  also reserved for major modes."
  But that would work really well for me ...
  Other comments are welcome.
-- 
Tim 
tim at tee jay forty nine dot com or akwebsoft dot com
http://www.akwebsoft.com, http://www.tj49.com

Re: Find bindings for all modes

[Robert Thorpe]

Tim Johnson <tim@akwebsoft.com> writes:
>  1)I am new to terminal mode (need it for ssh connections to my main
>  machine from netbooks)
>  2)I have a limited knowledge of emacs.
>  3)I do not work in a team environment
>  4)I have limited movement in my hands and painful arthritis in my
>  thumbs, thus I seek quick sequences and short reaches.
>  Functionally, my hands are semi-crippled.
>  5)I use a happy hacker keyboard on my mac, where the control key is
>  in the same place as the caps lock on convention keyboards and I
>  set up all my other computers with caps lock and control swapped.

John Mastro <john.b.mastro@gmail.com> writes:
> My goal is to have a general-purpose prefix key on the right hand side
> of the keyboard, to complement C-c.

I think I understand both of your requirements better now.  I'll reply
to you both at once if you don't mind.

I'd begin by asking: why do you want terminal mode?  The normal purpose
of terminals these days is SSHing into remote computers.  Tim, why do
you need terminal mode if you don't work in a team environment?  It's
not really very useful otherwise.  If you have several computers of your
own then you can network them better using VNC, Samba, scp, Rsync and/or
other programs.  SSH and Telnet are the basics of networking used
connection are very slow or if the sysadmin prohibits anything else.
If you want the look of terminal mode you can approximate that with
themes.

There are advantages to redefining basic keys like C-j, C-l, C-o, etc as
prefix keys.  But, it's tricky, it's not like normal key bindings.  Lots
of Emacs modes assume those keys are unchanged.  For example,
list-buffer binds C-o to Buffer-menu-switch-other-window.  If you rebind
C-o globally and you want Buffer-menu-switch-other-window then you're
going to have to bind it to something else in buffer menus.  The same
goes for many other modes.  If you read through the archives of this
list you'll see people often get bitten by this.  If you've a good bit
of experience with elisp then that helps.  AFAIK Emmanuel Berg, who
often comments here, has done this.

Tim, have you tried god-mode or evil?  They may be more useful for
dealing with limited hand mobility.

Tim Johnson <tim@akwebsoft.com> writes:
> I didn't know that C-c x was available in that fashion. Thanks, a
> do you have URLs or Help for further docs on this?

Using C-c X type keys is easy.  You can do something like:
(global-set-key (kbd "C-c a") 'previous-buffer)
Or, you can use local-set-key.  See:
(info "(emacs) Rebinding")

John Mastro <john.b.mastro@gmail.com> writes:
> Keys that are unbound by default are an understandably attractive
> option for mode authors. On the other hand, no mode that I know of
> rebinds C-h, so I only deal with the issue once. Also, these are all
> either pinky keys, off the home row, or both.

Mode authors should be using C-c C-X, that's the prefix keymap they're
supposed to use.  I haven't seen any that use C-'#.,;= , but I don't use
many non-built-in modes.  It's probably easier to make external modes
behave than it is to deal with the many internal ones that assume things
about keymaps.  That said, John's redefining of C-h is probably ok, not
many modes tinker with that.  Tim's plan to change C-j, C-l, C-o, etc is
more difficult, almost every mode changes those.

BR,
Robert Thorpe

Re: Find bindings for all modes

[Tim Johnson]

* Robert Thorpe <rt@robertthorpeconsulting.com> [141029 18:23]:
> I'd begin by asking: why do you want terminal mode?  The normal purpose
> of terminals these days is SSHing into remote computers.  Tim, why do
> you need terminal mode if you don't work in a team environment?   
  It is a given that I will be using SSH and terminal mode in both
  the host and the clients.

> There are advantages to redefining basic keys like C-j, C-l, C-o, etc as
> prefix keys.  But, it's tricky, it's not like normal key bindings.  Lots
> of Emacs modes assume those keys are unchanged.  For example,
> list-buffer binds C-o to Buffer-menu-switch-other-window.  If you rebind
> C-o globally and you want Buffer-menu-switch-other-window then you're
> going to have to bind it to something else in buffer menus.  The same
> goes for many other modes.  If you read through the archives of this
> list you'll see people often get bitten by this.  If you've a good bit
> of experience with elisp then that helps.  AFAIK Emmanuel Berg, who
> often comments here, has done this.
  The current keymaps have been used for years in gui mode. The new
  prefixes are : C-j, C-u and C-]. And there *have* been problems
  which have been worked out ...

> Tim, have you tried god-mode or evil?  They may be more useful for
> dealing with limited hand mobility.
  Say what? :) Never heard of them. I will be googling them as soon
  as I finish this message. Feel free to elaborate if you have the
  time and inclination.

<....> 
> Using C-c X type keys is easy.  You can do something like:
> (global-set-key (kbd "C-c a") 'previous-buffer)
> Or, you can use local-set-key.  See:
> (info "(emacs) Rebinding") 
  Thanks for the tip on 'info.
  I am currently rewriting my binding code so that I can set a
  global variable that will enable the C-j, C-l etc binding 
  OR
  C-c j, C-c l etc.

  Let way I can compare effects on my hands. 
<...>
> Tim's plan to change C-j, C-l, C-o, etc is
> more difficult, almost every mode changes those.
  Indeed. You're absolutely correct, although I have already worked
  out many of those issues. The tradeoff is that with using
  control-C
  (see
  https://www.gnu.org/software/emacs/manual/html_node/elisp/Key-Binding-Conventions.html
  and the following statement
  "Don't define C-c letter as a key in Lisp programs. Sequences
  consisting of C-c and a letter (either upper or lower case) are
  reserved for users; they are the only sequences reserved for
  users")

  I would have to reach down more with my index finger but I
  wouldn't have to worry about collisions and I would have the
  potential of shorter sequences with more keymaps.

  We've wandered far from the original question, but I have learned
  much. 
  
  Robert, thanks for your concise explanations and for being so
  patient with my unorthodox approach.

  regards

-- 
Tim 
tim at tee jay forty nine dot com or akwebsoft dot com
http://www.akwebsoft.com, http://www.tj49.com

Re: Find bindings for all modes

[Robert Thorpe]

Tim Johnson <tim@akwebsoft.com> writes:
>> Tim, have you tried god-mode or evil?  They may be more useful for
>> dealing with limited hand mobility.
>   Say what? :) Never heard of them. I will be googling them as soon
>   as I finish this message. Feel free to elaborate if you have the

Evil mode is Vi emulation.  It brings with it Vi's modal keybindings.
So, there's a command mode and an insert mode.

God mode does the same thing but it's based on Emacs' default keybinding.
So, you press the "command" mode key (normally ESC) and every key acts like
C-key.  So ESC f f e j o is the same as C-f C-f C-e C-j C-o.

Some people believe that these modes are better than chord keys for
people with hand problem.  I don't use either of them though.

BR,
Robert Thorpe

Re: Find bindings for all modes

[Tim Johnson]

* Robert Thorpe <rt@robertthorpeconsulting.com> [141101 13:06]:
> Tim Johnson <tim@akwebsoft.com> writes:
> >> Tim, have you tried god-mode or evil?  They may be more useful for
> >> dealing with limited hand mobility.
> >   Say what? :) Never heard of them. I will be googling them as soon
> >   as I finish this message. Feel free to elaborate if you have the
> 
> Evil mode is Vi emulation.  It brings with it Vi's modal keybindings.
> So, there's a command mode and an insert mode.
> 
> God mode does the same thing but it's based on Emacs' default keybinding.
> So, you press the "command" mode key (normally ESC) and every key acts like
> C-key.  So ESC f f e j o is the same as C-f C-f C-e C-j C-o.
  I have looked them up, I had known about viper and as a long-time
  vim user, they are both of some interest to me.
  thanks
-- 
Tim 
tim at tee jay forty nine dot com or akwebsoft dot com
http://www.akwebsoft.com, http://www.tj49.com