Re: view-mode keymap

[Jambunathan K <kjambunathan@gmail.com>]

Daimrod <daimrod@gmail.com> writes:

> Jambunathan K <kjambunathan@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> I think, `make-composed-keymap' can help here.
>>
>>
>>> I like `view-mode' but it conflicts with others minor mode map (paredit
>>> in my case).
>>>
>>> I would like to know if there is a better way to make a keymap that
>>> takes precedence over the others than manipulating
>>> `minor-mode-map-alist'.
>>>
>>> Here is my current implementation:
>>>
>>> (add-hook 'view-mode-hook
>>>           (lambda ()
>>>             ;; Makes sure `view-mode-map' is the first minor mode map
>>>             ;; available in `minor-mode-map-alist', because in case of
>>>             ;; conflicting bindings, the first one is used.
>>>             (unless (eq 'view-mode (caar minor-mode-map-alist))
>>>               (setf minor-mode-map-alist
>>>                     (cons (cons 'view-mode view-mode-map)
>>>                           (cl-remove 'view-mode minor-mode-map-alist
>>>                                      :key #'car))))))
>
> I've looked at it but I don't see how it can help. I don't want to
> create a new keymap, I want `view-mode-map' to take priority over other
> keymaps.

I was hoping that something like this

    (use-local-map
     (make-composed-keymap view-mode-map
                           (current-local-map)))    
        
will put `view-mode-map' on top of the keymap stack and thus overwrite
paredit's bindings.

I see that DEL (backspace) key is shared between view-mode and paredit.
My little experimentation that the above snippet failst to produce the
effect expected by me.

Do you think I am reading the doc of the APIs (used above) incorrectly?

>
> I've looked at the documentation and it seems that changing the order in
> `minor-mode-map-alist' is the only way to manage priorities between
> keymap, because they shouldn't conflict in there first place.

--