[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: New key binding syntax

From: Richard Stallman
Subject: Re: New key binding syntax
Date: Wed, 03 Nov 2021 22:33:58 -0400

[[[ To any NSA and FBI agents reading my email: please consider    ]]]
[[[ whether defending the US Constitution against all enemies,     ]]]
[[[ foreign or domestic, requires you to follow Snowden's example. ]]]

  > What wasn’t that ever normalized/documented? it always seemed to be that 
  > “kbd” was the standard way of specifying keystrokes… was it just informal?

It was a convenient way of specifying key sequences -- never more than that.

  > I always wondered: if one day emacs was to allow to gracefully support 
  > key-chords [0] (that is, using any key other as a “modifier”, so that you 
  > could press a and b at the same time and it would be a special keystrokes, 
  > which makes expressivity of keystrokes increase factorially with length 
  > instead of exponentially), at least in certain configurations.

That sounds nice, but using non-modifier keys as modifiers has an
inherent problem: those keys are supposed to do rollover.
If you press a, and while holding it down, press b, that is supposed
to mean a followed by b.

To make that count as "b modified by a", we would need to change how
the keyboard handles the a key.

  > That feature (actually, dirty hack, for now, but the author consider emacs 
  > to be misdesigned apparently, according implementation notes) is even 
  > advertised on emacs’ webpage through the emacsrock serie [1]

Sorry, I can't make sense of that.  What is "emacsrock"?  What does
"[1]" refer to?  When you say "on Emacs' webpage", what exact URL do
you mean?

Dr Richard Stallman (https://stallman.org)
Chief GNUisance of the GNU Project (https://gnu.org)
Founder, Free Software Foundation (https://fsf.org)
Internet Hall-of-Famer (https://internethalloffame.org)

reply via email to

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