[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: C-l while in menu?

From: Ben Wing
Subject: Re: C-l while in menu?
Date: Tue, 23 Apr 2002 02:13:41 -0700
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv: Gecko/20020314 Netscape6/6.2.2

Pavel Janík wrote:

  From: Ben Wing <address@hidden>
  Date: Mon, 22 Apr 2002 06:04:52 -0700

Ben, Stefan,

  > >>    I think it is very easy. We should use F10, and invent new variable
  > >>    f10-should-use-tmm (this is only idea to exactly describe its 
  > >>    defaulting to nil.


  > -- if you have an alt key separate from meta, you can use it for menu
  > accelerators.

I was not talking about accelerators. I know how to use them in XEmacs.

But the person I was responding to thought that you need an alt key separate from meta -- as you imply by where you cut my response. the fact is that things work quite well when you have only a meta key. e.g. meta+letter is an accelerator only when such a menu exists; otherwise, you get the regular binding -- and even then you can retrieve the shadowed binding with shift+meta+letter. are you sure you knew about all that?

in any case, under Windows the standard behavior of pressing and releasing the Alt key [i.e. meta] without hitting any other key traverses to the menu, although there's a var to turn it off. there is a command, lucid-menus-only, misleadingly called (not my creation) 'accelerate-menu' that traverses to the menu, but there doesn't seem to be a standard binding.

f10 is the obvious binding, to be Motif/Windows compatible.
shift-f10 would bring up a popup menu, equivalent to clicking the right mouse button.

I do not know if there is a key binding to pop-up the first menu in the
menubar. We would like Emacs to be compatible if XEmacs if it has that
feature. I do not use XEmacs so I'm asking: does XEmacs have that feature?
If so, what is the keybinding?

As Eli said: keyboard controlling menu is useless if you do not have a way
to enter menubar. Accelerators is one way, but I'm looking for the second
one right now.


Due to this misunderstanding I ignored the rest of your e-mail.

reply via email to

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