[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: National Language Support Functions

From: Lennart Borgman (gmail)
Subject: Re: National Language Support Functions
Date: Sat, 30 Dec 2006 01:14:30 +0100
User-agent: Thunderbird (Windows/20061207)

Juanma Barranquero wrote:
On 12/29/06, Lennart Borgman (gmail) <address@hidden> wrote:

Please explain a little bit more.

You're saying to users that (with your patch) it will work "more like
[it does] usually in MS Windows programs", not explaining why Emacs
does things differently, nor how (or why) that could be good. Little
wonder they prefer it "like MS Windows programs".

I explain (very short) in another place in the documentation for EmacsW32 why Emacs does it that way. I try to be short here, but if you have a better suggestion for how to write this please tell me.

I expect nothing. I'm explaining why I think the language on your page
is reason enough for people to choose your patched version.

I could be more neutral, you are right. But again, some help would be appreciated. Maybe there is a good neutral explanation and comparision somewhere on the net? I assume it must be written in a language that makes sense to new users who are used to MS Windows.

Though I am getting tired of
saying things over and over again.

That's part of the process of convincing people and getting patches approved.

That is good of course, but there is just too many, but perhaps rather small problem on the MS Windows side, unfortunately. Since MS Windows is not the main target this makes it problematic to convince people.

What about that patch that tells
Emacs to save the changes when a user logs off? I included that in my
patched version nearly half a year ago since I did not want to loose my
work. Is it included in Emacs today?

Why was not included? Was it deemed unnecessary, or wrong, or it just
fell off the wayside?

I think it just fell off the wayside. The reason? See above.

The low level keyboard hook that allows Emacs to use the left and right
windows keys as Emacs meta key should in my opinion be a very
uncontroversial issue.

That's quite a weird claim. On one hand you're championing Windows UI
guidelines compliance; on the other, you want Emacs to steal one of
the Windows keys, which is an uncommon thing for Windows programs to
do. Win+R or Win+E do execute Run and Windows Explorer even if typed
inside Notepad or Microsoft Word.

What a you trying to say? That the ability to use those keys as meta should be ruled out because it brakes the Windows UI guidelines? If I had a better choice I would take it. But steeling Alt is a far worse thing than steeling the Windows keys. The use of the Alt key is even specified in some of the Accessibility guidelines. I do not think the Windows keys are.

but it is hard for me to understand why it should be
scary to use a low level keyboard hook.

I looked at your low-level hook code once; it wasn't scary. It was
just complex for little gain.

There is simply no other way to do it. It as complex as it needs to be and as simple as it can be.

reply via email to

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