> On 03 Aug 2016, at 10:52, Nicolai Hess <nicolaih...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > 2016-08-03 10:36 GMT+02:00 Esteban Lorenzano <esteba...@gmail.com > <mailto:esteba...@gmail.com>>: > I will just re-post my first answer: > > if reintroduce them means reintroduce them hardcoded as before, then I’m > complete against it and I WILL NOT integrate such solution. > I’m sorry for being so strong here, but previous implementation was lame and > we need to get rid of them. > > Now, I understand people are used to use those bindings and also some others > (no idea which ones because I never used them… for me ocompletion is good > enough… but those are tastes). So I would be very happy to integrate a > generic way to define keybindings and outputs (which is already there, with > keymapping, but I mean an editor or something), and I would be very happy to > integrate a default configuration (which of course, will include > #ifTrue:/##ifFalse:) > > we already have > PharoShortcuts>>#displayIfFalseShortcut > ^ $f alt > > this is defined and therefore in the same kind "hardcoded" as any other > shortcut > doItShortcut > ^ $d meta > inspectItShortcut > ^ $i meta > In PharoShortcuts > > the action (RubSmalltalkEditor>>displayIfFalse: aKeyboardEvent) is just not > (yet) bound to this shortcut. > I don't see how this is an argument against this shortcut definition. All > other shortcuts are defined like that. > > And this is not really for adding a new feature. This shortcut already > (always :) ) existed in the old PluggableTextMorph based editor, it was just > lost (and not on purpose I think) like other things when > we moved to rubric (as you can see, the code for this action is already there > in rubric).
yes, it existed… and it was bad, as are bad all hardcoded shortcuts that yes, still exists a lot in the system. but we want to clean the system, not perpetuate it. for me, this is not a shortcut problem but a completion one… what we need to do is to enhance it. But even not doing it, I would not introduce new hardcoded shortcuts. Esteban > > > > > > > > > > Esteban > >> On 03 Aug 2016, at 10:30, Denis Kudriashov <dionisi...@gmail.com >> <mailto:dionisi...@gmail.com>> wrote: >> >> >> 2016-08-03 10:27 GMT+02:00 Guille Polito <guillermopol...@gmail.com >> <mailto:guillermopol...@gmail.com>>: >> I'm also against. >> >> - They take a place in the shortcuts that prevents others to use it >> - If lazy people really needs this, the code completion should be enhanced. >> This is a code completion concern... >> >> +1 > >
