Re: Keybindings in non-Latin layout

[Lennart Borgman <lennart.borgman@gmail.com>]

On Tue, May 5, 2009 at 8:29 PM, Andrey Paramonov <cmr.Pent@gmail.com> wrote:
> Stefan Monnier <monnier <at> iro.umontreal.ca> writes:
>> > I think in general, a "reactive" solution, like function-key-map, or the
>> > special handling of shifted keys (mapping them to unshifted variants if
>> > not bound) would be much more robust than a method like the above
>> > (the problem being that it essentially stores redundant state that can
>> > get out of sync).
>>
>> Agreed. The only difficulty is in building the reverse mapping, and in
>> making it apply to all forms of the key (with arbitrary modifiers), all
>> this ideally without adding yet-more-ad-hoc-C-code in the
>> read_key_sequence monster (or even removing some of it instead).
>>
>> Ideally, the same technique can be used to map mouse-4/5 to
>> wheel-up/down (with or without arbitrary modifiers).
>>
>
> I've looked at read_key_sequence function, and it is Ж:-O indeed (given I don't
> have much C experience). I could however notice that it doesn't contain
> platform-specific code. How come NTEmacs works nicely, while Emacs on my
> GNU/Linux system doesn't? Is NTEmacs a build of GNU Emacs or it is a different
> beast?

It is the same beast ...

I think the difference here may be in w32term.c but I am not sure.


> Please forgive my low level of Emacs internal knowledge ;-)
>
> Andrey
>
>
>
>
>