|
From: | Francis Wright |
Subject: | Re: Emacs Manual: G.5 Keyboard Usage on MS-Windows |
Date: | Sun, 17 Dec 2006 18:05:11 -0000 |
From: "Eli Zaretskii" <address@hidden> To: "Lennart Borgman" <address@hidden> Cc: <address@hidden>; <address@hidden> Sent: Sunday, December 17, 2006 4:21 AM Subject: Re: Emacs Manual: G.5 Keyboard Usage on MS-Windows
Date: Sun, 17 Dec 2006 02:34:23 +0100 From: Lennart Borgman <address@hidden> CC: Francis Wright <address@hidden>, address@hidden I did not follow this thread very carefully. However after some tips a year ago or more on EmacsWiki I wrote the following tip in the documentation that comes with EmacsW32: <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< AltGr+Control - Is That Possible? Emacs uses some keys that are a combination of AltGr+Control. Those keys might seem impossible to type on MS Windows since you might have heard that AltGr is the same as Alt+Control. The truth is that AltGr is the same as /Alt+Left Control/. You can still use the /AltGr+Right Control/. /Important:/ You must type /AltGr/ before /Right Control/! Normally the order between shift, control etc does not matter, but here they do. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Is that correct according to what you have found now, or?
For me, in Emacs 22, by default RCtrl-AltGR is equivalent to Ctrl-Meta provided I press the RCtrl key first and hold it, then press AltGr, which is the other way around to what you wrote above! If I press and hold AltGr and then press RCtrl, the RCtrl makes no difference.
If I set w32-recognize-altgr to nil then AltGR alone is equivalent to Ctrl-Meta and RCtrl has no effect, regardless of precisely when I press it.
Maybe it's correct, but it's not really relevant. We were talking about the w32-recognize-altgr option, which is pertinent to support of ALtGr itself, either the literal key or its equivalent combination Alt+Control. We said nothing about AltGr+Right Control.
Yes. However, I think it might be useful to document in the Emacs manual the way that RCtrl affects AltGr, which seems to be specific to Emacs and is not something that I would have expected.
[Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread] |