On Tue, 2011-09-06 at 11:57 -0700, John Ralls wrote: > On Sep 6, 2011, at 10:42 AM, Michael Natterer wrote: > > > On Tue, 2011-09-06 at 12:58 -0400, Paul Davis wrote: > >> On Tue, Sep 6, 2011 at 12:49 PM, Michael Natterer <[email protected]> wrote: > >>> On Tue, 2011-09-06 at 08:27 -0700, John Ralls wrote: > >> > >> [ ... imminent turf war ... ] > >> > >> this seems to be about two different things, neither of which are in > >> conflict (and i think john actually agrees with this). > >> > >> 1) whether or not the Alt key should generate MOD1 as a modifier > >> 2) whether or not code that wants to be cross-platform can assume that > >> they can use MOD1 with its own chosen semantics > >> > >> the problem is that (2) includes GTK, not just applications, and GTK > >> already makes this assumption. as a result, john changed the modifier > >> that alt/option generates on OS X, because (2) is not true for OS X. > >> > >> if (2) was fixed so that GTK was not an example of code that assumes > >> that MOD1 is free for any interpretation on any platform, then (1) is > >> moot, and it really doesn't matter what the Alt key generates on OS X > >> (hence, it could be MOD1). > >> > >> but as long as (2) remains an issue within GTK itself, its hard to > >> argue that a key that has clearly different purposes for a large body > >> of platform users of OS X should be handled by GTK as if it had some > >> different meaning based on another platform. > > > > That's not what I'm asking for. The only special meaning of "Alt" > > in GTK is to invoke mnemonics. Other than that, it's simply a modifier. > > Same on the Mac, it's just a modifier. Let's just disable the mnemonics > > on the Mac then. > > > > The fact that the OS uses it to generate special characters is > > not really relevant here. One X11 window manager "steals" key > > combo A from the app, the other one key combo B, there is nothing > > I can do about this. > > > > Turning "Alt" into "Alt" fixes more than it breaks. It fixes e.g. > > configuring GTK keybindings (you can easily make Alt-cursor do > > word navigation then, the config file says alt, it's all correctly > > mapped, the modifier says alt, and it just works). > > > > And it's not just key bindings. Alt-click should be alt-click, > > there is nothing wrong about that. If the OS decides to use it > > for its own purposes, then it's the job of higher-level code > > to be aware of that. > > > > If we need to change something in GTK as a consequence of that > > change, then so be it, but please let's not do strange stuff > > to the quartz' backend's modifier mapping just to accommodate > > some code in GTK that was never meant to handle the Mac, but > > can easily be changed to simply do it. > > It's not really different. Getting rid of the hard-coded association between > <alt> in an accelerator map or key binding and GDK_MOD1_MASK is part of > Paul's (2). I'd map it to GDK_META_MASK, but I'm open to super, hyper, or a > new GDK_ALT_MASK (bit 25, perhaps). It *is* the right thing to do, I think, > but it's not a quartz-only change and it probably would not be welcome in > gtk+-2.24.
It is not the right thing to do. Why do you insist on that, and what is wrong about the "hard-coded" association between ALT and MOD1_MASK? What is the problem about fixing GDK to map Alt to what is globally considered Alt, and then fix the platform-specific things in GTK+ afterwards? --Mitch _______________________________________________ gtk-devel-list mailing list [email protected] http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtk-devel-list
