On Wed 2016.11.30 at 18:32 +0100, Vadim Vygonets wrote:
> Quoth Okan Demirmen on Wed, Nov 30, 2016:
> > I suppose a future change could change the implicit 'command' binding to
> > something more explicit, such as "bind-key M-m command /usr/local/bin/magic"
> > While that requires a bit of surgery, I could make that a part of this 
> > overall
> > change?
> 
> Explicit commands sound good, whether they are a part of this
> change or a separate one.
> 
> > Never thought anyone would do that, but I guess something like:
> > 
> >     if (cmd == NULL) {
> >             free(kb);
> >             if (strcmp(bind, "*") == 0)
> >                     conf_unbind_key_all(c);
> >             goto out;
> >     }
> 
> Yep, looks good.

Actually that didn't work because of the keysym check. I just left
it where it was originally, but changed the keyword to 'all', just
in case someone complains about wanting to use '*' somewhere...

> > > This is not strictly correct: group-only-[n] never hides group n.
> > > Perhaps something like this would be better:
> > > 
> > >   Show group n, where n is 1-9, and hide the other groups.
> > 
> > True; the current wording is that way, and I didn't change it.
> 
> Before 1.63, group[n] was described as "Select group n", and in
> this context "like group[n]" made more sense.
> 
> > However,
> > your point is taken, maybe even to the point of using "group-showonly-[n]"
> > might be better?
> 
> Perhaps...  I'm fine with either name.

I re-worded the description, thanks.

In any case, this is in now. Some clean-up will happen..

Reply via email to