From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#17362: 24.4.50; inconsistent key notation: `ESC' vs `' Date: Mon, 28 Apr 2014 19:15:46 +0300 Message-ID: <83bnvlo2fh.fsf@gnu.org> References: Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1398701787 29280 80.91.229.3 (28 Apr 2014 16:16:27 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 28 Apr 2014 16:16:27 +0000 (UTC) Cc: 17362@debbugs.gnu.org To: Drew Adams Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Apr 28 18:16:19 2014 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1WeoE6-0007rm-Mt for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Mon, 28 Apr 2014 18:16:18 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:44920 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WeoE6-0003cS-5e for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Mon, 28 Apr 2014 12:16:18 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:48770) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WeoDx-0003PL-B7 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 28 Apr 2014 12:16:14 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WeoDr-00016T-4b for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 28 Apr 2014 12:16:09 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.43]:54924) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WeoDq-00013H-L6 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 28 Apr 2014 12:16:03 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1WeoDp-0008U8-Ss for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 28 Apr 2014 12:16:02 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Eli Zaretskii Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Mon, 28 Apr 2014 16:16:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 17362 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: Original-Received: via spool by 17362-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B17362.139870175232596 (code B ref 17362); Mon, 28 Apr 2014 16:16:01 +0000 Original-Received: (at 17362) by debbugs.gnu.org; 28 Apr 2014 16:15:52 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:44042 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1WeoDf-0008Tf-Ec for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 28 Apr 2014 12:15:52 -0400 Original-Received: from mtaout20.012.net.il ([80.179.55.166]:53305) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1WeoDc-0008TJ-Fm for 17362@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 28 Apr 2014 12:15:50 -0400 Original-Received: from conversion-daemon.a-mtaout20.012.net.il by a-mtaout20.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) id <0N4R00G000L7UQ00@a-mtaout20.012.net.il> for 17362@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 28 Apr 2014 19:15:41 +0300 (IDT) Original-Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 ([87.69.4.28]) by a-mtaout20.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) with ESMTPA id <0N4R00GO9164VI10@a-mtaout20.012.net.il>; Mon, 28 Apr 2014 19:15:40 +0300 (IDT) In-reply-to: X-012-Sender: halo1@inter.net.il X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 3.x X-Received-From: 140.186.70.43 X-BeenThere: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org List-Id: "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.bugs:88362 Archived-At: > Date: Mon, 28 Apr 2014 08:39:06 -0700 (PDT) > From: Drew Adams > Cc: drew.adams@oracle.com, 17362@debbugs.gnu.org > > > Actually, the distinction should be between "ESC" (or "TAB" or "SPC") > > the key vs "ESC ESC ESC" the key sequence typed from the keyboard. So > > not every should suddenly become "FOO", it's a judgment call. > > A difference in syntax for keyboard keys vs key sequences should not be > subject to judgment calls. There are presumably clear-cut rules defining > the two different syntaxes. The rules might be clear to humans, but not to a global search-and-replace. By "judgment call" I meant that a human should decide which case is which, and act accordingly.