On 6/28/05, Stefan Monnier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > The answer is (as has been mentioned on this list a while back) that > terminal-escape-sequences should not be handled with function-key-map but > with a new map placed before function-key-map (and applied unconditionally, > like key-translation-map but unlike function-key-map).
Does the other thread talk about other bugs that would be fixed? Richard didn't seem to like the idea of adding a new feature for this, but it _sounds_ pretty simple (to add an unconditional translation layer), and if it fixes other bugs too... well... I dunno. BTW, do we really care about user bindings of S-TAB that much? Couldn't we just tell them to bind backtab instead? It seems very likely that most user code that binds S-TAB does same thing as the packages we've discussed in this thread (bind 2-3 variants but essentially meaning backtab), and would either already work with backtab, or it it would be clean to modify them to bind backtab too. -Miles -- Do not taunt Happy Fun Ball. _______________________________________________ Emacs-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-devel
