[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: C-Ret: cua and icicles

From: Drew Adams
Subject: RE: C-Ret: cua and icicles
Date: Mon, 24 May 2010 15:08:23 -0700

Listen, I am not trying to say anything about how CUA mode should be
implemented.  I only questioned whether it really should make C-RET in the
minibuffer be `cua-set-rectangle-mark' (which question you snipped).  I cannot
say it should or should not, since I don't use CUA mode and am no expert on it.
I just raised the question based on the command name: I don't imagine rectangles
in the minibuffer (but why not?).

> > (since CUA-mode lays hold C-RET ubiquitously).
> I think that is a problem. It is used to start rectangle editing which
> surely is a nice feature for those who needs it, but it is IMO not
> important enough to steel the C-RET key. You can customize it in cua,
> but I think the default should be some less important key.
> And this is part of cua-mode just because Kim wrote it ;-)
> It is nice but not included in what I talk about when I mention
> cua-mode. I think it should be moved to a global minor mode on its own
> (not an emulation minor mode).

That may be (or not be).  It's not for me to say.  Whether C-RET should be bound
by CUA mode by default or included in CUA mode at all is a different question.
I did not question that.  That apparently is your topic (not mine or the OP's).

I just asked whether - assuming it _should_ bind C-RET in general, that binding
is also appropriate for the minibuffer.  And that too is not for me to say - I
do not know.

I am in no way objecting to the CUA design or how it is implemented.  I simply
tried to reply to your comment that Icicles should automatically take care of
the kind of customization that the user wanted.  I hope I was clear.

> > The only way to take back C-RET for the minibuffer is to 
> > remap the CUA-imposed command to a command that DTRT,
> > distinguishing the minibuffer.  Fortunately, it
> > is trivial for an Icicles user to do that using Customize.
> You can customize the binding in cua-mode too. That is what I 
> have done.

Your point was that users should not have to deal with such customization, that
"Icicles should of course try to do this, not you".  Now you are saying that a
user can take care of it himself by customizing cua-mode.  That's no doubt good
for users to know, but it does not speak to your point.

> cua-mode should NOT do that but the key and command we are talking
> about should not be in cua-mode.
> I think all who knows about cua-mode on the devel list are aware of
> this. It is just a matter of time, someone must have time to fix it. I
> have included Kim in the receivers here if he has a different opinion.

Dunno, but it seems to me you've sidetracked the thread.  The OP just wanted to
let others know about a simple customization to be able to use C-RET for Icicles
in the minibuffer while still using CUA mode.  You stated that Icicles should do
that for him.  I tried to explain the interaction among the keymaps etc.  Now
you're onto another question for CUA development of whether C-RET should even be
part of CUA mode.  What's next?

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]