[Top][All Lists]

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

RE: ESC vs Meta for shifted keys

From: Drew Adams
Subject: RE: ESC vs Meta for shifted keys
Date: Thu, 12 Apr 2018 07:52:07 -0700 (PDT)

> >> I think it's just a bug: when left-word and right-word were introduced
> >> only one pair of bindings was updated and not the other.
> >
> > I'm not sure it's a bug.  My guess is that it was by design
> > (for whatever reason).  Perhaps Eli or someone else can
> > enlighten us.
> >
> > I kinda doubt it was an oversight.  All of those bindings
> > are together, and the person who changed the Meta bindings
> > likely searched for `forward-word', not "[M-right]" or
> > "(kbd "M-<right>")"...
> >
> > In `bindings.el':
> >  (global-set-key [M-right]  'right-word)
> >  (define-key esc-map [right] 'forward-word)
> >  (global-set-key [M-left]   'left-word)
> >  (define-key esc-map [left] 'backward-word)
> They both used to be bound to {forward,backward}-word, and were
> updated at the same time. They're only different in R2L text.

The question raised was whether the apparent
non-update of the esc-map bindings was deliberate
or an oversight.

When you say "they" were bound ... and "they" were
updated at the same time, is it the same "they"?
Does "they" refer to the global and esc-map keys
for the update, as well as for the old bindings?

Are you saying that the esc-map bindings used to
be bound to (forward|backward)-*, and they were
"updated" (at the same time as the global-map
keys) to the same keys: (forward|backward)-*?

reply via email to

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