[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: Bikeshedding go! Why is <M-f4> unbound?

From: Lennart Borgman
Subject: Re: Bikeshedding go! Why is <M-f4> unbound?
Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2011 09:28:40 +0100

On Fri, Jan 14, 2011 at 6:02 AM, Jason Rumney <address@hidden> wrote:
> On 14/01/2011 08:21, Lennart Borgman wrote:
>>> More specifically the events should come as the following sequence:
>>> Alt Down
>>> F4 Down with Alt modifier set
>>> F4 Up with Alt modifier set
>>> Alt Up
>>> If the second event is passed to Windows to handle, I suspect the third
>>> event may not arrive to Emacs.
>> Is then all we have to do pass the second event to Windows?
> That is the easy part.

Yes. If you know that is what you should do ;-)

> The more difficult part is checking whether the key
> is bound in Emacs first.  Does your low level keyboard hook patch already do
> something like this?

No, it doesn't implement any support for this and I do not think it is
the right level since it is working on a lower level, before the
message loop and does not have all the required information collected
AFAICS (but I might be missing something). The only purpose of it is
to prevent Windows from handling certain keys that you cannot prevent
it to handle other ways. See this link (which does not tell everything
about LowLevelKeyboardProc however):


But Emacs message loop (not the w32 level) does collect info about key
sequences available. Can't that info be transferred and used for the
w32 level message loop as grishka suggested?
> Otherwise adding a default binding on Windows only to
> send the SC_CLOSE system event is another way of handling it that is closer
> to the system behaviour than the alternative bindings that have been
> suggested here.

reply via email to

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