[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Deprecation of define-key?
From: |
Philip Kaludercic |
Subject: |
Re: Deprecation of define-key? |
Date: |
Tue, 02 Aug 2022 10:11:30 +0000 |
Lars Ingebrigtsen <larsi@gnus.org> writes:
> Augusto Stoffel <arstoffel@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> Wouldn't it make sense to let keymap-set take multiple key-definition
>> pairs as arguments, like setq et al? This would be very convenient
>> e.g. in user configuration files, where currently one often finds long
>> sequences of define-key calls. This looks much better to me:
>>
>> (keymap-set some-map
>> "a" 'command-a
>> "b" 'command-b
>> "c" 'command-c)
>
> I think that makes sense, and we'd just have to extend the definition
> from
>
> (keymap-set KEYMAP KEY DEFINITION)
>
> to
>
> (keymap-set KEYMAP KEY DEFINITION &rest PAIRS)
>
> But how should the indentation be? It's not a definition form, so
> indenting it like the above would be unusual.
Why should this kind of indentation only be used for definition forms?
I wouldn't consider `progn', `pcase', or `cl-callf' definitions, and
they all have the `lisp-indent-function' property set. I believe the
indentation that Augusto suggested is perfectly reasonable.