RE: iswitchb-mode and iswitchb-global-map

[Drew Adams]

> > 1. Shouldn't `iswitchb-global-map' be renamed
> > `iswitchb-mode-map'?  Wouldn't that better follow the
> > minor-mode naming convention?
>
> Yes, but iswitchb-mode-map is already used for something else, so it would
> be an incompatible change.

I see. I didn't know that. Is that map perhaps for a local version of the
minor mode? That is, are there two different maps, one for global use and
one for local use? I'm just curious - this is new to me. If so, is there a
naming convention for that, or should there be one? How about
`iswitch-global-mode-map', instead, to signal that a (minor) mode is
involved?

> > 2. Shouldn't `iswitchb-global-map' be redefined anew each
> > time `iswitchb-mode' is turned on?
>
> Kind of, yes.  I've changed the code to use command remapping
> instead to get
> the same kind of result.

I'm interested, so I'll take a look when I get a chance. Perhaps a similar
approach would be useful for my code as well. I guess perhaps you mean that
you used remapping in place of substitute-key-definition.