Re: [PATCH] Override Windows default Win-* key combinations when using Emacs

[covici]

Jussi Lahdenniemi <address@hidden> wrote:

> >> The patch is attached. I decided to place the new functionality in a new
> >> file (w32hook.c) - it could have been added to some existing file as well.
> >
> > I'd prefer not to create a new file, but to have this in w32fns.c.  It
> > might even allow you to make some functions static.
> 
> OK.
> 
> >> address@hidden w32-register-hot-key
> >> address@hidden w32-unregister-hot-key
> >> -  MS-Windows reserves certain key combinations, such as
> >
> > I'm not sure I understand why you moved this stuff down in the file.
> > Was something wrong with its original place?  You could make the
> > changes without moving the stuff, no?
> 
> In the documentation for w32-register-hot-key I am now referring to
> the w32-[lr]window-modifier variables; there is a strongish dependency
> between these now. For this reason, I preferred documenting the
> w32-*-hot-key functions after the w32-*-modifier part. But of course,
> this is not a must.
> 
> >> +   The hotkey registrations always also include all the shift and
> >> +control modifier combinations for the given hotkey; that is,
> >> +registering @address@hidden as a hotkey gives you @address@hidden,
> >> address@hidden@key{a}} and @address@hidden as well.
> >
> > I believe you meant to use "C-S-" etc. here, for the Shift key (not
> > "super").
> 
> No, what I mean is that registering s-a also registers S-s-a, C-s-a,
> and C-S-s-a. I wrote S-*-a as *-A in that documentation, base on the
> observation that for example C-h k M-S-a is shown as M-A by Emacs. But
> maybe it would be better to write a lower-case a and explicit S
> modifier in all the cases?
> 
> >> -            if (NUMBERP (Vw32_phantom_key_code))
> >> -              key = XUINT (Vw32_phantom_key_code) & 255;
> >> -            else
> >> -              key = VK_SPACE;
> >
> > It looks like you are removing the support for this feature.  Is it
> > really not needed anymore?  If so, we should mention this change in
> > NEWS, and tell there how to achieve the same effect without this
> > variable.
> 
> True. I have never used the w32-phantom-key-code myself, so I did not
> notice that (and, actually, the variable is still checked - 
> unnecessarily - in w32inevt.c). But, setting
> w32-pass-[lr]window-to-system to NIL has now the desired effect even
> without the use of a phantom key code; the keypress is routed directly
> from the hook function to the Emacs input handler, without passing
> through the standard system keyboard functionality inbetween, which
> eliminates the need to lie to the system about the key that has been
> pressed.
> 
> > I've briefly reviewed the rest of the patch, and it looks OK to me.
> > Did you make sure the new code doesn't call any API that might be
> > unavailable on older systems?  We still support Windows 98 and later.
> 
> Unfortunately, Windows 98 does not include the low-level keyboard hook
> functionality that is essential for my code to work. It is supported
> in Windows 2000 (and even NT4, apparently), but not on the 95/98/ME
> branch.
> 
> So, probably I would need to change the code so that the old
> functionality is preserved and used if the new API are not available
> (pre-Win2000), in the same style that w32uniscribe works? It should
> still even be possible to write a single configuration file that works
> on both environments.
> 
> > Also, I understand that this code will work on versions of Windows
> > before v8, is that right?
> 
> I have tested the code on Windows 10 (my physical PC) and Windows 7
> (in a VM) both as 32-bit and 64-bit versions. I'll try to get Win2000
> installed on another VM as well and test with it, just to be sure.
> 
> -- 
> Jussi Lahdenniemi

I have a screen reader which is also doing keyboard coding at the low
level,  I wonder if this patch  would effect that program?  Also, I hope
you don't hijack alt-tab, that is necessary even when emacs is running.



-- 
Your life is like a penny.  You're going to lose it.  The question is:
How do
you spend it?

         John Covici
         address@hidden