bug-gnu-emacs
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

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

bug#18023: 24.3.92; [PATH] Missing fallback in latin-postfix input metho


From: Daimrod
Subject: bug#18023: 24.3.92; [PATH] Missing fallback in latin-postfix input method
Date: Tue, 22 Jul 2014 13:38:29 +0900
User-agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.3.92 (gnu/linux)

Eli Zaretskii <address@hidden> writes:

>> From: Daimrod <address@hidden>
>> Cc: Stefan Monnier <address@hidden>,  address@hidden
>> Date: Tue, 22 Jul 2014 09:28:26 +0900
>> 
>> Eli Zaretskii <address@hidden> writes:
>> 
>> >> From: Stefan Monnier <address@hidden>
>> >> Date: Mon, 21 Jul 2014 14:33:44 -0400
>> >> Cc: address@hidden
>> >> 
>> >> > This patch permits the user to type " _" using the latin-postfix input
>> >> > method. ATM the user has to use the following sequence:
>> >> > `SPC SPC DEL _'
>> >> 
>> >> I have no objection to the patch, but don't have time to evaluate it
>> >> (I'm travelling and only have occasionally Internet access).
>> >
>> > FWIW, it strikes me that "C-q _" is less typing.
>> 
>> It's not consistent and it doesn't really save typing:
>> - "SPC _ _"
>> - "SPC C-q _"
>
> I meant "SPC SPC DEL _".  As for "SPC _ _", it's of the same length,
> so it doesn't save typing, either.

It wasn't clear in my initial message so it's my fault. In my patch, I
update the latin-postfix input-method so that one can type "SPC _ _"
instead of "SPC SPC DEL _".

Though I agree that it doesn't save typing compared to the method you
proposed, my approach saves typing compared to the current method and I
find my method faster to type because it's consistent with the other
combinations and it doesn't "break the flow".

-- 
Daimrod/Greg





reply via email to

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