From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Lennart Borgman Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Bikeshedding go! Why is unbound? Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2011 23:23:10 +0100 Message-ID: References: <315B881CD79A43A9BABD5145EF4BFFE6@us.oracle.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1295303048 8129 80.91.229.12 (17 Jan 2011 22:24:08 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2011 22:24:08 +0000 (UTC) Cc: monnier@iro.umontreal.ca, pj@irregularexpressions.net, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Drew Adams Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Jan 17 23:24:03 2011 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1PexUN-0004d7-7A for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 17 Jan 2011 23:23:51 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:56038 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1PexUB-0000md-Qa for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 17 Jan 2011 17:23:39 -0500 Original-Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=48944 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1PexU5-0000mJ-KH for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 17 Jan 2011 17:23:34 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1PexU4-000244-At for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 17 Jan 2011 17:23:33 -0500 Original-Received: from mail-ew0-f41.google.com ([209.85.215.41]:36657) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1PexU4-00023x-5w for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 17 Jan 2011 17:23:32 -0500 Original-Received: by ewy27 with SMTP id 27so2798249ewy.0 for ; Mon, 17 Jan 2011 14:23:31 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=rGnLKyUiBlETncG2CmFcK42XJuTgFroNOOFCzjQhXV4=; b=KDDLZiKNbub/Uu//4lKiDnZrqB4fahXZtijitM6MwnA1ChCnWOrlSz58qgTDeFBmNE U2C6m1ncDRn2Y54dKpccTjj5tVjD7HLGcx2uRjNf+o3e/Mx78HZeBbSDxR3w18eeOswS VG/FmdDHKGDvLfzbfzOAL4WsjTGz+JLzI9AoI= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=rjAxL3MYsIsJDMneCUXzcOPDR+GnN5tsDTCKgpl0ZjocLMd+yznwan8qmYxJyQJKa1 9AjsDK6QiTkM9CYsOcS/U4fUal9JTEqnVPv/7GqcNnl5ApIzepZomO+NJFMcP6mlnr1Y /dpOwp9P1ysIr8Ivql33yHVNGEQELlPh3Jfro= Original-Received: by 10.213.35.147 with SMTP id p19mr4531516ebd.19.1295303011364; Mon, 17 Jan 2011 14:23:31 -0800 (PST) Original-Received: by 10.213.20.148 with HTTP; Mon, 17 Jan 2011 14:23:10 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 2) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:134671 Archived-At: On Mon, Jan 17, 2011 at 10:56 PM, Drew Adams wrote: > >> (It can't be a library choice AFAICS since no library is >> involved for an unbound key, but of course >> a library coiuld provide ways for the user to make this choice.) > > Any Lisp code today can decide to capture the unbound error using > `condition-case', as mentioned earlier. =C2=A0You can determine at the Li= sp level > what happens when an unbound error is raised. But this can't be done when entering a command (in Emacs command loop). Or am I missing something? And in the cases where you are not entering a key sequences in the command loop you can test if the given key sequence is unbound. > Your initial position was, I think, that Emacs must _always_ pass Alt-f4 = to w32 > (I could be wrong). Yes. You could be wrong ;-) -- like everyone else. I simply was not explicit on that because it did not seem important to me. Please see my question above for why.