From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: quimby.gnus.org!not-for-mail From: storm@cua.dk (Kim F. Storm) Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Command remapping and the delete-frame problem. Date: 24 Feb 2002 01:41:11 +0100 Message-ID: <5xr8nb4spk.fsf@kfs2.cua.dk> References: <5x3czwjqxs.fsf@kfs2.cua.dk> <7263-Wed20Feb2002194728+0200-eliz@is.elta.co.il> <5xd6yzwxs8.fsf@kfs2.cua.dk> <200202220433.g1M4XP414080@aztec.santafe.edu> <5xd6yx965v.fsf_-_@kfs2.cua.dk> <200202232019.g1NKJaY14614@aztec.santafe.edu> NNTP-Posting-Host: quimby2.netfonds.no Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: quimby2.netfonds.no 1014511487 17729 195.204.10.66 (24 Feb 2002 00:44:47 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@quimby2.netfonds.no NNTP-Posting-Date: 24 Feb 2002 00:44:47 GMT Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([199.232.76.164]) by quimby2.netfonds.no with esmtp (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian)) id 16emmV-0004br-00 for ; Sun, 24 Feb 2002 01:44:47 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=fencepost.gnu.org) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1 (Debian)) id 16emk1-0004OW-00; Sat, 23 Feb 2002 19:42:13 -0500 Original-Received: from mail.filanet.dk ([195.215.206.179]) by fencepost.gnu.org with smtp (Exim 3.33 #1 (Debian)) id 16emhy-0004Jq-00; Sat, 23 Feb 2002 19:40:06 -0500 Original-Received: from kfs2.cua.dk.cua.dk (unknown [10.1.82.3]) by mail.filanet.dk (Postfix) with SMTP id 3BE5E7C047; Sun, 24 Feb 2002 00:40:04 +0000 (GMT) Original-To: rms@gnu.org In-Reply-To: <200202232019.g1NKJaY14614@aztec.santafe.edu> Original-Lines: 25 User-Agent: Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.2.50 Errors-To: emacs-devel-admin@gnu.org X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.5 Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: Emacs development discussions. List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: Xref: quimby.gnus.org gmane.emacs.devel:1474 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:1474 Richard Stallman writes: > Are you now saying that remapping should have been implemented > using a specific `command' prefix like this: > > (define-key map [command command1] 'command2) > > I am not sure about that. I was talking about what should go in the > keymap data structure. I have just reworked my original patch for command remapping to use a `remap' prefix-key for command remapping: (define-key map [remap command1] 'command2) Please read the updated section in NEWS. This removes the ambiguity between commands and event symbols, and it has the added bonus of removing some of the limitations on the previous implementation. Specifically, a command can now be remapped into anything accepted by define-key (not just another command). I think the new method is much cleaner. -- Kim F. Storm http://www.cua.dk _______________________________________________ Emacs-devel mailing list Emacs-devel@gnu.org http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-devel