Re: Do we need to bind to both RET and <return> variants?

[Stefan Monnier]

> So for the Modifier + RET bindings, we need to define the Modifier +
> <return> bindings too, right?

Actually, for most modifiers <mod> + RET simply doesn't exist (in the
sense that the terminals will typically simply send the same byte
sequence as if you had typed RET).

And AFAIK for M-RET (which is also known as `ESC RET`) we do have
a corresponding remapping from M-return to M-RET, so you only need to
bind M-RET and not M-return.

If you find this messy, it's because it is.

Other messy details include the fact that M-RET is the same as `ESC
RET`, but M-left is not the same as `ESC left`.

If someone wants to straighten this out, it'd be great.


        Stefan