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: Keybindings in non-Latin layout Date: Tue, 5 May 2009 22:11:57 +0200 Message-ID: References: <5f0660120905020830o4a21cc3v6932025bab16c76e@mail.gmail.com> <87ocuaqu3n.fsf@mail.jurta.org> <87ws8wtoa3.fsf@mail.jurta.org> <87ljpcjmr6.fsf@catnip.gol.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: ger.gmane.org 1241554386 19505 80.91.229.12 (5 May 2009 20:13:06 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 5 May 2009 20:13:06 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Andrey Paramonov Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue May 05 22:12:56 2009 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 4.50) id 1M1R0a-0007ZG-1n for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 05 May 2009 22:12:56 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:56610 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1M1R0Z-0003vO-4s for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 05 May 2009 16:12:55 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1M1Qzi-0003Ox-F2 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 05 May 2009 16:12:02 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1M1Qzf-0003M0-00 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 05 May 2009 16:12:02 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=33167 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1M1Qze-0003Lx-RG for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 05 May 2009 16:11:58 -0400 Original-Received: from mail-bw0-f161.google.com ([209.85.218.161]:36213) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1M1Qze-00083R-Ew for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 05 May 2009 16:11:58 -0400 Original-Received: by bwz5 with SMTP id 5so5268957bwz.42 for ; Tue, 05 May 2009 13:11:57 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:in-reply-to:references :date:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=O2xvIdVe7wJMQBhgTcFwGbUc7d9i9VSbVF05UqS8jmc=; b=ifQmPDG+erirQUv+Qn5Hly5AN95GivMGicIQawlpsxzBagg3JpwARmQigU0lTXsq3Y 29pR6f8N+2vEB8iFvN9tM4t3qiZOCFRp2IGAK2zIpdAG5jY8dbnzQJgQdcC/LkhmN1FL ffXMB1/55trBoWz7OUk/0rjdO1UnVujVeSqU0= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=xtXObhQW5kcnbv2IP5tV5aQCaE2PBaHbtVRhmJgTehs2yWUtrFDcugnHcsWAAtMqlN H9VQlqUUBLGz0jMDwZ2a0jJF0L/MqCVLVqjv52I1S5+eQOF1mAy2J5BMfQ3SJUwMJLXR XGaiqocEMlRNuha6GwTIlZzV9vu9+KvgOhCdk= Original-Received: by 10.223.116.205 with SMTP id n13mr552829faq.103.1241554317207; Tue, 05 May 2009 13:11:57 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: X-detected-operating-system: by monty-python.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:110690 Archived-At: On Tue, May 5, 2009 at 8:29 PM, Andrey Paramonov wrote= : > Stefan Monnier iro.umontreal.ca> writes: >> > I think in general, a "reactive" solution, like function-key-map, or t= he >> > special handling of shifted keys (mapping them to unshifted variants i= f >> > 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 =D0=96:-O indeed (gi= ven 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 diff= erent > 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 > > > > >