[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: master 859190f 2/3: Convert some keymaps to defvar-keymap

From: Gregory Heytings
Subject: Re: master 859190f 2/3: Convert some keymaps to defvar-keymap
Date: Thu, 14 Oct 2021 19:31:27 +0000

However, that style as implemented by 'kbd' is not without its problems. It is too allowing in some cases where it would be better to be more strict:

Yes, one possible improvement would have been to implement a stricter "kbd" to use in this case.

Stefan Monnier says that we should also be able to say things like [(control x)], and I have no objections to that.

This should not change and does not change with the proposal.

Frankly, I don't see how this minor, and as I've said almost theoretical problem, should force us to create yet another syntax and yet another set of key binding functions.

Ambiguity is not a good property to have in our most fundamental interfaces, IMO.

The proposed syntax is not ambiguous AFAICS. It's true that there's one corner case, which could potentially affect a handful of users, who want to bind the upper case letters C, S, M and H, or the lower case letter s, followed by a dash. IMO sacrificing a simple solution for that corner case is not reasonable.

I think we should not try to retro-fit any DWIM stuff on the old one, as that will lead to various problems. It would be better to provide a new one and promote that as a replacement.

The existing key binding functions have existed for several decades, so it would take several decades to replace them other ones.

reply via email to

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