And this is how it works in VA Smalltalk. The default shortcut to expand the abbreviations used there is Shift-Space. See this excellent video by the late James Robertson: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TY_rJ3G0Tn4
If the same default abbreviations were used as in VA Smalltalk, this would be even cooler. No need to relearn. Cheers, Bernhard > Am 03.08.2016 um 10:56 schrieb Ben Coman <[email protected]>: > > On Wed, Aug 3, 2016 at 4:36 PM, Esteban Lorenzano <[email protected]> wrote: >> 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:) > > I would guess code expansions could be many and varied between > different individuals, and quickly consume available keyboard > shortcuts. Perhaps a generic mechanism would be single shortcut for > "code expansion" which processes the letters preceding the cursor. > For example, using shortcut <ctrl-e> for code expansion and typing... > > itf<ctrl-e> > > ==> ifTrue: [ ] ifFalse: [ ] > > The could be an interface to define these code expansions - initially > at least on a purely personal basis. > >> And this is not really for adding a new feature. This shortcut already >> (always :) ) existed > > With a single shortcut for code expansion, perhaps a few other > existing combinations could be freed up. > > cheers -ben > >> >> Esteban >> >> On 03 Aug 2016, at 10:30, Denis Kudriashov <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> >> 2016-08-03 10:27 GMT+02:00 Guille Polito <[email protected]>: >>> >>> 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 >> >> >
