Re: Is `kbd' idempotent?

[Michael Heerdegen <michael_heerdegen@web.de>]

Random832 <random832@fastmail.com> writes:

> What about calling kbd only if the 'read' result is a string? That way
> if they really want to pass a self-made string, they can do e.g.
> (identity "foo"), whereas "foo" alone will be treated as (kbd "foo")

I want to avoid to introduce such a complexity for that little gain.
From what I heard, I think it's cleaner to let the user type the `kbd'
call if he prefers the `kbd' format.

> I do wonder what the use case is, though, that benefits from allowing
> the entry of an arbitrary lisp expression instead of just directly
> passing the user input to kbd without even a read/eval stage. Are there
> key sequences that can't be represented in kbd format that the user will
> want to enter as vector literals?

The input can be inserted via copy and paste or another method different
from typing literally.  Also the binding of a variable or the result
of something like (my-private-version-of-kbd KEYS ...) should be
supported.


Thanks,

Michael.