The size
of the command name plus 4 characters of the "M-x " string should
define the maximum length of allowed substitutions, and if the command
is bound to several key, then to print as many keys as many of them
fits into this limit. For example:
That would be a big in con
However, I would prefer a list of preferred bindings, in order of
preference, to a single binding. If, for some reason, the exact binding is
not known (e.g. might have changed), so that the first preference isn't
available (bound), the next available binding would be used, in order.
> While I can understand the impulse behind this heuristic, it ultimately
> seems paternalistic ("we need to prepare you for the great variety of
> terminals that you may encounter").
No, it's just done for lack of anything better. Currently, Emacs almost
never knows which keys you have access to
> I think we should devise some way to get the desired result
> without going through contorsions like `advertized-bla'.
> ... the first thing that jumps to my mind is to rely
> on a `preferred-binding' property (containing a key-sequence)
> on the command symbol, or otherwise r
On Sat, 15 Oct 2005 07:54:14 -0400, Stefan Monnier wrote:
> There is no way to get this kind of control. `substitute-command-keys' has
> some rules such as "prefer a binding using plain ascii keys" (so it'll
> prefer C-x < over C-next, based on the principle that not all terminals have
> a `next'
> Does anyone know how to control which of several bindings for
> a command is displayed by `substitute-command-keys'?
There is no way to get this kind of control.
I think we should devise some way to get the desired result
without going through contorsions like `advertized-bl
> Does anyone know how to control which of several bindings for
> a command is displayed by `substitute-command-keys'?
There is the same problem for the key suggestion feature activated by
`suggest-key-bindings' displaying in the echo area only the "first"
key binding which is
> Also, is there a good way to control which of several key bindings for a
> command is output by `substitute-command-keys'? The only way
> I've found is to make sure that the one I want is the last of the key
> sequences for that command defined in the map - and that's not always
>
> Does anyone know how to control which of several bindings for a command is
> displayed by `substitute-command-keys'?
There is no way to get this kind of control. `substitute-command-keys' has
some rules such as "prefer a binding using plain ascii keys" (so it'll
prefer C-x < over C-next, based
I never got any feedback on this question:
Also, is there a good way to control which of several key bindings for a
command is output by `substitute-command-keys'? The only way
I've found is to make sure that the one I want is the last of the key
sequences for that command defined
> to get the simpler representation, S-tab, from
> the less readable ?
if you want a Shift-TAB, try (kbd "S-TAB"),
[(shift ?\t)], or [?\S-\C-i].
Thanks! Using [(shift ?\t)] works fine.
___
Emacs-devel mailing list
Emacs-devel@gnu
Drew Adams wrote:
> Why was the output from `key-description' and `substitute-command-keys'
> changed to use angle brackets around simple key sequences like S-tab?
I would guess to make them consistent with kbd, insert-kdb-macro,
edit-kbd-macro, and view-lossage.
> I have, for instance, a help s
12 matches
Mail list logo
