[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: C-q vs documentation
From: |
Stefan Monnier |
Subject: |
Re: C-q vs documentation |
Date: |
Wed, 26 Mar 2003 10:27:23 -0500 |
> > The reason why I used this-single-command-raw-keys is because CHAR
> has
> > already been through key-translation-map, so pushing it back onto
> > the unread-command-events will cause it to go through
> key-translation-map
> > a second time, which can result in incorrect results.
> >
> > I don't think so. read-event does not use key-translation-map.
>
> Sorry, I meant function-key-map.
>
> Yes, I see. So it should save the character from before
> translation, and unread that.
What's wrong with the code I used instead ?
Stefan
- C-q vs documentation, Marco Parrone, 2003/03/20
- Re: C-q vs documentation, Richard Stallman, 2003/03/22
- Re: C-q vs documentation, Stefan Monnier, 2003/03/24
- Re: C-q vs documentation, Marco Parrone, 2003/03/24
- Re: C-q vs documentation, Richard Stallman, 2003/03/24
- Re: C-q vs documentation, Stefan Monnier, 2003/03/24
- Re: C-q vs documentation, Richard Stallman, 2003/03/25
- Re: C-q vs documentation,
Stefan Monnier <=
- Re: C-q vs documentation, Richard Stallman, 2003/03/26
- Re: C-q vs documentation, Stefan Monnier, 2003/03/27