Emacs keyboard

Emacs keyboard

[B. T. Raven]

Hey Emacsers:

Does any of you know of a keyboard still in production that has
dedicated keys for both alt and meta keys? (two of each, one right and
one left). If such a thing were to exist could Emacs use all of the mod
keys (shift, ctl, meta, super, hyper, alt)? The os could sense all of
these depressed at once but it's pretty difficult to accomplish
ergonomically. Four of these (two on each side) could be latched (made
sticky in hardware) and then be unlatched by being pressed again or
combined with an alpha key in a succeeding keychord. For example, after
C-h k and then pressing a bunch of mod keys I get:

C-H-M-S-s-a is undefined

I think this is the limit on usb keyboards (6 key rollover). Would Emacs
sense and allow binding to the A-C-H-M-S-s-a keychord if the hardware
allowed it? (ps2).

Thanks,

Ed

Re: Emacs keyboard

[William Gardella]

"B. T. Raven" <btraven@nihilo.net> writes:

> Hey Emacsers:
>
> Does any of you know of a keyboard still in production that has
> dedicated keys for both alt and meta keys? (two of each, one right and
> one left). If such a thing were to exist could Emacs use all of the mod
> keys (shift, ctl, meta, super, hyper, alt)? The os could sense all of
> these depressed at once but it's pretty difficult to accomplish
> ergonomically. Four of these (two on each side) could be latched (made
> sticky in hardware) and then be unlatched by being pressed again or
> combined with an alpha key in a succeeding keychord. For example, after
> C-h k and then pressing a bunch of mod keys I get:
>
> C-H-M-S-s-a is undefined
>
> I think this is the limit on usb keyboards (6 key rollover). Would Emacs
> sense and allow binding to the A-C-H-M-S-s-a keychord if the hardware
> allowed it? (ps2).
>
> Thanks,
>
> Ed

Yes, with one caveat: the Alt modifier in Emacs is usually used as a
so-called "dead key" for input of various accented characters etc.,
often with a meaning for both the shifted and unshifted version of the
key.  So it'd probably map to C-H-M-s-[funky symbol]. :)

It'd be cool if you bound C-H-M-s-£ to something.

-- 
WGG
I use grml (http://grml.org/)

Re: Emacs keyboard

[J G Miller]

On Wednsday, December 12th, 2012, at 21:07:59h -0600, B. T. Raven asked:

> Does any of you know of a keyboard still in production that has
> dedicated keys for both alt and meta keys?

Do not most full keyboards have

   [Left Windoze_key][Left Alt][space][Right Alt][Right Windoze_key] ?


It is easy enough to remap the Left and Right windoze keys to be meta keys
either for the virtual consoles (via console setup key map)
or in an Xsession (with xmodmap).

Usually Xorg server maps them by default to Super_L and Super_R respectively.

Re: Emacs keyboard

[Peter Dyballa]

Am 13.12.2012 um 04:07 schrieb B. T. Raven:

> Does any of you know of a keyboard still in production that has
> dedicated keys for both alt and meta keys? (two of each, one right and
> one left).

Is this one OK? http://www.apple.com/keyboard/

--
Greetings

  Pete

Either this man is dead or my watch has stopped.
				- Groucho Marx

Re: Emacs keyboard

[B. T. Raven]

> Am 13.12.2012 um 04:07 schrieb B. T. Raven:
> 
>> Does any of you know of a keyboard still in production that has
>> dedicated keys for both alt and meta keys? (two of each, one right and
>> one left).
> 
> Is this one OK? http://www.apple.com/keyboard/

This is more like it, except with the shift keys moved to the bottom row
inboard of the control keys and the space bar split into backspace-space:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Space-cadet.jpg


Anyway, thanks, William, J G, and Peter. The apple keyboard has only two
mod keys flanking the space bar; I want four of them flanking the space
bar and back space bar so they can be used just as a traditional typist
uses the shift key: right hand mod key with left hand alpha and vice
versa. It seem like a shame to waste the alpha key on exotic character
generation when input methods accomplish that much more elegantly.

If you wanted currency signs at your finger tips you could do

(global-set-key [(control $)] (lambda () (interactive)  (insert  ?€ )))
€
(global-set-key [(meta $)] (lambda () (interactive)  (insert  ?£ )))
£
(global-set-key [(super meta $)] (lambda () (interactive)  (insert  ?¥ )))
¥
 or even the generic currency sign ¤, but the input methods offer a more
intuitive way. In latin-postfix Y= produces the yen sign. Someone should
add the other 25 most common currency symbol to this input method: i.e.
E= makes euro sign, etc. If you wanted to write E=mc² while this input
method were active you would have to type the = sign twice to turn the
euro sign back into E=

super meta is needed on w32 since the os traps super (windows key) ? for
some security hocus pocus. The strict opposite hand mod key practice can
easily be dropped in special cases like (org-mode) C-c C-x C-i where
it's easier to hold the control key down with one hand and hunt and peck
for the alpha keys with the other hand, but typing left ctl and then
right ctl (Dvorak layout) isn't really much slower when you get used to
it. That way contorsions are never involved.

Ed



> 
> --
> Greetings
> 
>   Pete
> 
> Either this man is dead or my watch has stopped.
> 				- Groucho Marx
> 
> 

Re: Emacs keyboard

[David Combs]

I find that standard keyboards, with the control-key down at the
bottom, a real pain to use with emacs, vi, and any other program
that uses control-chars as commands.

Sun (er, oracle) makes that type of keyboard, but
also makes one with the control key immediately left
of the "A" key, where it was on the original
teletype-like machine (name escapes me now, but it
ended in "33").

That placement sure makes it easier to use programs
like emacs and vi.

David

Re: Emacs keyboard

[Loic J. Duros]

dkcombs@panix.com (David Combs) writes:

> Sun (er, oracle) makes that type of keyboard, but
> also makes one with the control key immediately left
> of the "A" key, where it was on the original
> teletype-like machine (name escapes me now, but it
> ended in "33").

What's the difference with moving the ctrl key to the caps lock key on a
standard keyboard?
http://emacswiki.org/emacs/MovingTheCtrlKey

Re: Emacs keyboard

[James Freer]

On Fri, 4 Jan 2013, Loic J. Duros wrote:

> dkcombs@panix.com (David Combs) writes:
>
>> Sun (er, oracle) makes that type of keyboard, but
>> also makes one with the control key immediately left
>> of the "A" key, where it was on the original
>> teletype-like machine (name escapes me now, but it
>> ended in "33").
>
> What's the difference with moving the ctrl key to the caps lock key on a
> standard keyboard?
> http://emacswiki.org/emacs/MovingTheCtrlKey

It's not a big difference... just preference - less far to stretch the fingers. 
Capslock always used to be the location of the ctrl key on early keyboards 
which happened to suit those that use the wordstar keybindings (which are the 
most efficient in professional writers opinion... and mine). A lot of emacs 
users like them swapped for emacs bindings. Although i've got used to using the 
right ctrl key for wordstar mode.

james

Re: Emacs keyboard

[ken]

On 01/05/2013 04:05 AM James Freer wrote:
> On Fri, 4 Jan 2013, Loic J. Duros wrote:
>
>> dkcombs@panix.com (David Combs) writes:
>>
>>> Sun (er, oracle) makes that type of keyboard, but
>>> also makes one with the control key immediately left
>>> of the "A" key, where it was on the original
>>> teletype-like machine (name escapes me now, but it
>>> ended in "33").
>>
>> What's the difference with moving the ctrl key to the caps lock key on a
>> standard keyboard?
>> http://emacswiki.org/emacs/MovingTheCtrlKey
>
> It's not a big difference... just preference - less far to stretch the
> fingers. Capslock always used to be the location of the ctrl key on
> early keyboards which happened to suit those that use the wordstar
> keybindings (which are the most efficient in professional writers
> opinion... and mine). A lot of emacs users like them swapped for emacs
> bindings. Although i've got used to using the right ctrl key for
> wordstar mode.
>
> james

Amen (or +1 if you prefer) on both counts.  Having learned to type on an 
actual typewriter and having started into computers with those old 
teletype machines, and then into PCs with DOS 1.0, I appreciate being 
able to have the Ctrl next to the 'A' key.  That's where it was on the 
first PCs and where it stayed until, perhaps just coincidentally but 
perhaps not coincidentally, Microsoft came out with Word.  At the time 
Wordstar was the top editor.  But because using Wordstar entailed using 
the Ctrl key a lot, moving it to the keyboard's hinterlands made it 
difficult to use and it thereby lost a lot of market share to Word. 
Isn't it wonderful how a market economy can even rearrange your keyboard?

The second Amen/+1 goes to Wordstar keybindings.  Somebody put a whole 
lot of thought into them and made them the most intuitive of any editor 
of that time and since.  You could easily learn how to move around all 
around in a file you were editing in under an hour and then remember all 
of the keybindings the next day.  Most all the Wordstar keybindings for 
navigation were also language-independent; that is, you didn't have to 
know English for them to make sense and so be easily memorable.  If I 
was just starting out in computing and wasn't already so accustomed to 
emacs keybindings, I'd definitely go to something like joe\jstar for an 
editor.

Re: Emacs keyboard

[James Freer]

On Sun, 6 Jan 2013, ken wrote:

> On 01/05/2013 04:05 AM James Freer wrote:
>> On Fri, 4 Jan 2013, Loic J. Duros wrote:
>> 
>>> dkcombs@panix.com (David Combs) writes:
>>> 
>>>> Sun (er, oracle) makes that type of keyboard, but
>>>> also makes one with the control key immediately left
>>>> of the "A" key, where it was on the original
>>>> teletype-like machine (name escapes me now, but it
>>>> ended in "33").
>>> 
>>> What's the difference with moving the ctrl key to the caps lock key on a
>>> standard keyboard?
>>> http://emacswiki.org/emacs/MovingTheCtrlKey
>> 
>> It's not a big difference... just preference - less far to stretch the
>> fingers. Capslock always used to be the location of the ctrl key on
>> early keyboards which happened to suit those that use the wordstar
>> keybindings (which are the most efficient in professional writers
>> opinion... and mine). A lot of emacs users like them swapped for emacs
>> bindings. Although i've got used to using the right ctrl key for
>> wordstar mode.
>> 
>> james
>
> Amen (or +1 if you prefer) on both counts.  Having learned to type on an 
> actual typewriter and having started into computers with those old teletype 
> machines, and then into PCs with DOS 1.0, I appreciate being able to have the 
> Ctrl next to the 'A' key.  That's where it was on the first PCs and where it 
> stayed until, perhaps just coincidentally but perhaps not coincidentally, 
> Microsoft came out with Word.  At the time Wordstar was the top editor.  But 
> because using Wordstar entailed using the Ctrl key a lot, moving it to the 
> keyboard's hinterlands made it difficult to use and it thereby lost a lot of 
> market share to Word. Isn't it wonderful how a market economy can even 
> rearrange your keyboard?
>
> The second Amen/+1 goes to Wordstar keybindings.  Somebody put a whole lot of 
> thought into them and made them the most intuitive of any editor of that time 
> and since.  You could easily learn how to move around all around in a file 
> you were editing in under an hour and then remember all of the keybindings 
> the next day.  Most all the Wordstar keybindings for navigation were also 
> language-independent; that is, you didn't have to know English for them to 
> make sense and so be easily memorable.  If I was just starting out in 
> computing and wasn't already so accustomed to emacs keybindings, I'd 
> definitely go to something like joe\jstar for an editor.

Jstar when i'd discovered it was excellent for me. I started using wordstar in 
the 80s... that's how old i am! But i use an editor for text not coding... alas 
jstar doesn't have emacs "visual line mode" or softwrap as some folk call it. 
All the graphical editors seem to and so does vim with "set linebreak". Emacs 
also does 'hotch' (as i call it - i think it's called 'mid screen cursor 
positioning' or something like that) - one's typing and gets to the bottom of 
the screen... automatically it moves up half a screen - that is so useful. Not 
appreciated until you've used it. Jstar does that but it's a shame about the 
softwrap. The author is doing some development again on Joe.

Emacs does all so that's why i'll stick to it. I'd prefer a cut down version or 
being able to remove ALL the functions from the menu i don't want. The games 
and calculator... all that stuff i don't want. But i'm still learning emacs... 
quite a lot of learning! I'd love a basic word processor included... something 
that just does the basics with an rtf file for letters and memos.

james

Re: Emacs keyboard

[Dan Espen]

James Freer <jessejazza3.uk@gmail.com> writes:

> On Sun, 6 Jan 2013, ken wrote:
>
>> On 01/05/2013 04:05 AM James Freer wrote:
>>> On Fri, 4 Jan 2013, Loic J. Duros wrote:
>>>
>>>> dkcombs@panix.com (David Combs) writes:
>>>>
>>>>> Sun (er, oracle) makes that type of keyboard, but
>>>>> also makes one with the control key immediately left
>>>>> of the "A" key, where it was on the original
>>>>> teletype-like machine (name escapes me now, but it
>>>>> ended in "33").
>>>>
>>>> What's the difference with moving the ctrl key to the caps lock key on a
>>>> standard keyboard?
>>>> http://emacswiki.org/emacs/MovingTheCtrlKey
>>>
>>> It's not a big difference... just preference - less far to stretch the
>>> fingers. Capslock always used to be the location of the ctrl key on
>>> early keyboards which happened to suit those that use the wordstar
>>> keybindings (which are the most efficient in professional writers
>>> opinion... and mine). A lot of emacs users like them swapped for emacs
>>> bindings. Although i've got used to using the right ctrl key for
>>> wordstar mode.
>>>
>>> james
>>
>> Amen (or +1 if you prefer) on both counts.  Having learned to type
>> on an actual typewriter and having started into computers with those
>> old teletype machines, and then into PCs with DOS 1.0, I appreciate
>> being able to have the Ctrl next to the 'A' key.  That's where it
>> was on the first PCs and where it stayed until, perhaps just
>> coincidentally but perhaps not coincidentally, Microsoft came out
>> with Word.  At the time Wordstar was the top editor.  But because
>> using Wordstar entailed using the Ctrl key a lot, moving it to the
>> keyboard's hinterlands made it difficult to use and it thereby lost
>> a lot of market share to Word. Isn't it wonderful how a market
>> economy can even rearrange your keyboard?
>>
>> The second Amen/+1 goes to Wordstar keybindings.  Somebody put a
>> whole lot of thought into them and made them the most intuitive of
>> any editor of that time and since.  You could easily learn how to
>> move around all around in a file you were editing in under an hour
>> and then remember all of the keybindings the next day.  Most all the
>> Wordstar keybindings for navigation were also language-independent;
>> that is, you didn't have to know English for them to make sense and
>> so be easily memorable.  If I was just starting out in computing and
>> wasn't already so accustomed to emacs keybindings, I'd definitely go
>> to something like joe\jstar for an editor.
>
> Jstar when i'd discovered it was excellent for me. I started using
> wordstar in the 80s... that's how old i am! But i use an editor for
> text not coding... alas jstar doesn't have emacs "visual line mode" or
> softwrap as some folk call it.

Never tried it (or wanted it), but:

http://penguinpetes.com/b2evo/index.php?p=144

  HOWTO make Emacs use soft word wrap like other editors!

> All the graphical editors seem to and
> so does vim with "set linebreak". Emacs also does 'hotch' (as i call
> it - i think it's called 'mid screen cursor positioning' or something
> like that) - one's typing and gets to the bottom of the
> screen... automatically it moves up half a screen - that is so
> useful. Not appreciated until you've used it.

What Emacs does is completely customizable.

You should not find this surprising.

> Jstar does that but it's
> a shame about the softwrap. The author is doing some development again
> on Joe.
>
> Emacs does all so that's why i'll stick to it. I'd prefer a cut down
> version or being able to remove ALL the functions from the menu i
> don't want. The games and calculator... all that stuff i don't
> want. But i'm still learning emacs... quite a lot of learning! I'd
> love a basic word processor included... something that just does the
> basics with an rtf file for letters and memos.

I think you'll eventually find the menus can be modified.

The best part of Emacs is the way it'll do just about anything.

-- 
Dan Espen

Re: Emacs keyboard

[James Freer]

On Sun, 6 Jan 2013, Dan Espen wrote:

> James Freer <jessejazza3.uk@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> On Sun, 6 Jan 2013, ken wrote:
>>
>>> On 01/05/2013 04:05 AM James Freer wrote:
>>>> On Fri, 4 Jan 2013, Loic J. Duros wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> dkcombs@panix.com (David Combs) writes:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Sun (er, oracle) makes that type of keyboard, but
>>>>>> also makes one with the control key immediately left
>>>>>> of the "A" key, where it was on the original
>>>>>> teletype-like machine (name escapes me now, but it
>>>>>> ended in "33").
>>>>>
>>>>> What's the difference with moving the ctrl key to the caps lock key on a
>>>>> standard keyboard?
>>>>> http://emacswiki.org/emacs/MovingTheCtrlKey
>>>>
>>>> It's not a big difference... just preference - less far to stretch the
>>>> fingers. Capslock always used to be the location of the ctrl key on
>>>> early keyboards which happened to suit those that use the wordstar
>>>> keybindings (which are the most efficient in professional writers
>>>> opinion... and mine). A lot of emacs users like them swapped for emacs
>>>> bindings. Although i've got used to using the right ctrl key for
>>>> wordstar mode.
>>>>
>>>> james
>>>
>>> Amen (or +1 if you prefer) on both counts.  Having learned to type
>>> on an actual typewriter and having started into computers with those
>>> old teletype machines, and then into PCs with DOS 1.0, I appreciate
>>> being able to have the Ctrl next to the 'A' key.  That's where it
>>> was on the first PCs and where it stayed until, perhaps just
>>> coincidentally but perhaps not coincidentally, Microsoft came out
>>> with Word.  At the time Wordstar was the top editor.  But because
>>> using Wordstar entailed using the Ctrl key a lot, moving it to the
>>> keyboard's hinterlands made it difficult to use and it thereby lost
>>> a lot of market share to Word. Isn't it wonderful how a market
>>> economy can even rearrange your keyboard?
>>>
>>> The second Amen/+1 goes to Wordstar keybindings.  Somebody put a
>>> whole lot of thought into them and made them the most intuitive of
>>> any editor of that time and since.  You could easily learn how to
>>> move around all around in a file you were editing in under an hour
>>> and then remember all of the keybindings the next day.  Most all the
>>> Wordstar keybindings for navigation were also language-independent;
>>> that is, you didn't have to know English for them to make sense and
>>> so be easily memorable.  If I was just starting out in computing and
>>> wasn't already so accustomed to emacs keybindings, I'd definitely go
>>> to something like joe\jstar for an editor.
>>
>> Jstar when i'd discovered it was excellent for me. I started using
>> wordstar in the 80s... that's how old i am! But i use an editor for
>> text not coding... alas jstar doesn't have emacs "visual line mode" or
>> softwrap as some folk call it.
>
> Never tried it (or wanted it), but:
>
> http://penguinpetes.com/b2evo/index.php?p=144
>
>  HOWTO make Emacs use soft word wrap like other editors!
>
>> All the graphical editors seem to and
>> so does vim with "set linebreak". Emacs also does 'hotch' (as i call
>> it - i think it's called 'mid screen cursor positioning' or something
>> like that) - one's typing and gets to the bottom of the
>> screen... automatically it moves up half a screen - that is so
>> useful. Not appreciated until you've used it.
>
> What Emacs does is completely customizable.
>
> You should not find this surprising.
>
>> Jstar does that but it's
>> a shame about the softwrap. The author is doing some development again
>> on Joe.
>>
>> Emacs does all so that's why i'll stick to it. I'd prefer a cut down
>> version or being able to remove ALL the functions from the menu i
>> don't want. The games and calculator... all that stuff i don't
>> want. But i'm still learning emacs... quite a lot of learning! I'd
>> love a basic word processor included... something that just does the
>> basics with an rtf file for letters and memos.
>
> I think you'll eventually find the menus can be modified.

Hi Dan

> The best part of Emacs is the way it'll do just about anything.

> Dan Espen

Yes i agree... it's just taking me a while to find my way round it all.

james

Re: Emacs keyboard

[Filipp Gunbin]

On 05/01/2013 04:33, David Combs wrote:

> I find that standard keyboards, with the control-key down at the
> bottom, a real pain to use with emacs, vi, and any other program
> that uses control-chars as commands.
>
> Sun (er, oracle) makes that type of keyboard, but
> also makes one with the control key immediately left
> of the "A" key, where it was on the original
> teletype-like machine (name escapes me now, but it
> ended in "33").
>
> That placement sure makes it easier to use programs
> like emacs and vi.
>
> David

But, with control in the home row you lose symmetry. I find it most
convenient to press all modifiers with one hand and the actual key with
another. That would not be possible with one control in all cases. And
with chords consisting only of Control, Alt and Shift, it's much less
pain to have Control at the bottom... Control in the home row is best
for simple keys like `C-f', but what to do with `C-M-t', for example?

-- 
Filipp Gunbin

Re: Emacs keyboard

[J. David Boyd]

Filipp Gunbin <fgunbin@fastmail.fm> writes:

> On 05/01/2013 04:33, David Combs wrote:
>
>> I find that standard keyboards, with the control-key down at the
>> bottom, a real pain to use with emacs, vi, and any other program
>> that uses control-chars as commands.
>>
>> Sun (er, oracle) makes that type of keyboard, but
>> also makes one with the control key immediately left
>> of the "A" key, where it was on the original
>> teletype-like machine (name escapes me now, but it
>> ended in "33").
>>
>> That placement sure makes it easier to use programs
>> like emacs and vi.
>>
>> David
>
> But, with control in the home row you lose symmetry. I find it most
> convenient to press all modifiers with one hand and the actual key with
> another. That would not be possible with one control in all cases. And
> with chords consisting only of Control, Alt and Shift, it's much less
> pain to have Control at the bottom... Control in the home row is best
> for simple keys like `C-f', but what to do with `C-M-t', for example?

Interesting, I've never thought much about that.

I've always been a left-hand Ctl or Meta person, but I like your idea,
if I can train my fingers.

Right now, for C-M-t, I press C and M with my left pinky and thumb, and
reach across for the t with my right hand.  Otherwise, I do a three key
chord with my left hand.

Using the right hand for C and M would make things easier.

Thanks for the (to most people, obvious, but not me) idea!

Dave

Re: Emacs keyboard

[James Freer]

On Sun, Jan 6, 2013 at 3:51 AM, Filipp Gunbin <fgunbin@fastmail.fm> wrote:
> On 05/01/2013 04:33, David Combs wrote:
>
>> I find that standard keyboards, with the control-key down at the
>> bottom, a real pain to use with emacs, vi, and any other program
>> that uses control-chars as commands.
>>
>> Sun (er, oracle) makes that type of keyboard, but
>> also makes one with the control key immediately left
>> of the "A" key, where it was on the original
>> teletype-like machine (name escapes me now, but it
>> ended in "33").
>>
>> That placement sure makes it easier to use programs
>> like emacs and vi.
>>
>> David
>
> But, with control in the home row you lose symmetry. I find it most
> convenient to press all modifiers with one hand and the actual key with
> another. That would not be possible with one control in all cases. And
> with chords consisting only of Control, Alt and Shift, it's much less
> pain to have Control at the bottom... Control in the home row is best
> for simple keys like `C-f', but what to do with `C-M-t', for example?
>
> --
> Filipp Gunbin

Having done a bit of experimenting i agree. However, making capslock
control, keeping symmetry in place (with the two ctrl bottom left and
bottom right), the F12 or unused windows keys (bottom next to alt on
Uk keyboard anyway) is worth trying.

james

Re: Emacs keyboard

[David Combs]

In article <mailman.16729.1357356945.855.help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org>,
Loic J. Duros <lduros@member.fsf.org> wrote:
>dkcombs@panix.com (David Combs) writes:
>
>> Sun (er, oracle) makes that type of keyboard, but
>> also makes one with the control key immediately left
>> of the "A" key, where it was on the original
>> teletype-like machine (name escapes me now, but it
>> ended in "33").
>
>What's the difference with moving the ctrl key to the caps lock key on a
>standard keyboard?
>http://emacswiki.org/emacs/MovingTheCtrlKey
>
>

Looks interesting!

Thanks!

David