Abdelrazak Younes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > For one LFUN_INSET_TOGGLE did not have an associated name, I fixed > this in r23884. Problem is that C-i is binded to > LFUN_NEXT_INSET_TOGGLE not LFUN_INSET_TOGGLE... maybe we should merge > the two LFUN?
There is some logic in these two function and a reason why they were like that. I do not have time to expand now, but the two lfuns cooperate to get the necessary result, and the function you want to bind to is LFUN_NEXT_INSET_TOGGLE. If I remember well, LFUN_INSET_TOGGLE has weird semantics (check where the cursor is supposed to point) and could _maybe_ be replaced by a virtual method. JMarc
