Re: lynx-dev 2.8.2dev.16 patch 1 - Keys, tab changes

[Doug Kaufman]

On Sun, 14 Feb 1999, Klaus Weide wrote:

> > Since K_BackTab in DJGPP is already at 0x10F, why the special handling
> > in LYStrings.c. Is this in case BACKTAB_KEY changes its value?  Wouldn't
> > it be easier to just remove these lines?
> >  
> > > + case K_BackTab:            /* BackTab */
> > > +    c = BACKTAB_KEY;
> > > +    break;
> 
> You are right - it was just "easier" for me to change one line than to
> delete three of them. :)  Actually, I didn't verify that those three
> lines apply exactly to the case where 0x10F already is the backtab code,
> so it seemed safer to make it explicit.

Yes, this is exactly the case where the DJGPP_KEYHANDLER assigns the
BackTab key to 0x10F.
 
> Although "in case it changes" may be a valid reason to keep it, that's
> up to you.

I would recommend that these three lines be deleted. That way the only
keys remapped in LYStrings.c are those that conflict with lynx reserved
keys. Otherwise, in a few years others will be scratching their heads
trying to figure out why this mapping is there.
                                   Doug
__
Doug Kaufman
Internet: address@hidden (preferred)
          address@hidden