From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: master 3b41141708: Expose the name of an event's input device to Lisp Date: Sun, 10 Apr 2022 09:49:03 +0300 Message-ID: <83wnfx77s0.fsf@gnu.org> References: <164933858147.29834.15050766441005536059@vcs2.savannah.gnu.org> <87ee28xyg2.fsf@yahoo.com> <83ee28az95.fsf@gnu.org> <87fsmow1hz.fsf@yahoo.com> <83a6cway59.fsf@gnu.org> <87tub4uivu.fsf@yahoo.com> <83y20fakwn.fsf@gnu.org> <87o81bu7zj.fsf@yahoo.com> <83v8vjai4s.fsf@gnu.org> <87bkxbsqfl.fsf@yahoo.com> <835yniah0u.fsf@gnu.org> <8735impqw4.fsf@yahoo.com> <83v8vi8uyu.fsf@gnu.org> <871qy6o9p3.fsf@yahoo.com> <83o81a8qnd.fsf@gnu.org> <87zgkulbuu.fsf@yahoo.com> <83ilri8iag.fsf@gnu.org> <87tub1kbkf.fsf@yahoo.com> <831qy58ofh.fsf@gnu.org> <87sfqlfomt.fsf@yahoo.com> Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="33158"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: larsi@gnus.org, rms@gnu.org, monnier@iro.umontreal.ca, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Po Lu Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Sun Apr 10 08:51:04 2022 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1ndRPb-0008Qh-EV for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Sun, 10 Apr 2022 08:51:03 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:59540 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1ndRPa-0003U2-6U for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Sun, 10 Apr 2022 02:51:02 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:47346) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1ndRNj-0001te-7D for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 10 Apr 2022 02:49:08 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]:37778) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1ndRNi-0001hA-Nn; Sun, 10 Apr 2022 02:49:06 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gnu.org; s=fencepost-gnu-org; h=References:Subject:In-Reply-To:To:From:Date: mime-version; bh=S761P/U/FhRFOQjn6ku5HsKaiqt57gQ7rlbghiJ/KEU=; b=TY8UL8MsDqAy 0dh0ra/HXszOXOnHAI8EMLrt9ceyvlPupN/LJGUD2IdfrveBiVQCvgO4Df7UshTIFhX1ZLsNDUBcR fcvTeDbDMyFww5rsORXnfzn7NiXx+bvdapwtasVS2yJcRE50VMGuZ0O/lhSXtb+oWYaD5gmwZhBcp /veLqOSrNcm1X2ZYNoC6LVF77rWuwln2Re9Qe2Xgr7Ku1V4Tim9prq470Ryfad3TKTmknEFQsemFi 0jcSny0wGxTCLBBaY6m/nctxX//p2wQyFaxJO1WhAgrvg7kUwWDrQyTJL1YSYR5g/hNy6wFJIxURq BT43bevHOiGzjkrUDAt1cw==; Original-Received: from [87.69.77.57] (port=3241 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1ndRNg-0003SI-CP; Sun, 10 Apr 2022 02:49:04 -0400 In-Reply-To: <87sfqlfomt.fsf@yahoo.com> (message from Po Lu on Sun, 10 Apr 2022 14:17:46 +0800) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:288105 Archived-At: > From: Po Lu > Cc: larsi@gnus.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org, rms@gnu.org, > monnier@iro.umontreal.ca > Date: Sun, 10 Apr 2022 14:17:46 +0800 > > Eli Zaretskii writes: > > > We've been through this: the second mouse should have its buttons > > numbered starting from some number N to distinguish it from the first. > > For example, N could be 11, so the buttons are mouse-11, mouse-12, > > etc. > > How do you decide which mouse is the "second mouse"? Why is this detail important? Conceptually, some code that runs at Emacs startup will enumerate the mice and decide which one is which and how to name its buttons. Are you saying that this is impossible in principle? > Hmm, then I suppose a better anology would be > `overriding-terminal-local-map'. If I connect the second mouse to a > different X display, I can make input from that mouse behave differently > by changing the keymap for the terminal associated with that other > display. > > Why shouldn't I be able to do that with the second mouse when it is > connected to the same X display as the first mouse? I think the question is rather "why do you think you _have_ to be able to do the same when a second mouse is connected?" IOW, if this second mouse can be handled by existing Lisp-level infrastructure, why do we need to introduce new infrastructure, and one that leaks low-level information to Lisp on top of that?