Re: Patch for command remapping through keymaps

[Eli Zaretskii]

On 28 Jan 2002, Kim F. Storm wrote:

> + C-h k now reports the actual command (after possible remapping) run by
> + the key sequence.

I have a difficulty understanding, from this description alone, the
change in behavior.  An example would probably help.  Also, please
add a reference to the other part in NEWS, where remapping is
described (otherwise, ``possible remapping'' is unclear).

The change in define-key is a user-level change, so I think its
description should not be confined to the Lisp changes part of NEWS.
(I suspect that many users don't read that part.)

> + When a key sequence is read from the keyboard corresponds to a
> + command which has been remapped

I think "is" should be removed from this sentence, or replaced with
"that is".

>   the command it is remapped to will be
> + executed instead of the original command.

I think ``run'' is better than ``executed''.

> + - the new variable `this-original-command' contains the original command
> +   when executing a key sequence results in a remapping of that command.

I understand that this-original-command is non-nil only when a command
was found to be remapped.  If so, perhaps it's better to set
this-original-command unconditionally, to avoid the need for extra
tests on the Lisp level.  Thus, if a command is not remapped
this-command and this-original-command will have identical values.

Finally, the user and Lisp manuals should be updated with these
changes.