[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
bug#14084: 24.3.50; `substitute-command-keys': allow for expansion of <r
From: |
Drew Adams |
Subject: |
bug#14084: 24.3.50; `substitute-command-keys': allow for expansion of <remap>... |
Date: |
Tue, 10 May 2022 15:30:47 +0000 |
> This information is displayed in different ways in different contexts.
> With this test case:
>
> (keymap-local-set "C-c c" #'foo)
> (keymap-local-set "<remap> <foo>" #'bar)
>
> (defun foo ()
> (interactive)
> "Call with \\[foo]."
> (message "foo"))
>
> (defun bar ()
> (interactive)
> "Call with \\[foo]."
> (message "bar"))
>
> C-h b (for instance) says
>
> <remap> <foo> bar
> C-c c foo
>
> while C-h f foo RET says
>
> Its keys are remapped to ‘bar’. Without this remapping, it would be
> bound to C-c c.
>
> I think the `C-h b' output could perhaps be reorganised, because bar
> and
> foo frequently are displayed far apart, so the person looking for the
> key for bar would have to look around.
>
> We could, for instance, add an extra line here.
>
> But did you have other contexts in mind?
1. Please reread the bug report. It's specific about
what behavior is requested - see below.
2. Please don't reply here using `keymap-*'. If you
want to communicate with me about key bindings,
please use the standard, traditional functions.
I don't have, and cannot use, Emacs 28, 29 etc.
The bug/request was reported for Emacs 24. It's
still relevant, I believe.
Specific request, from the bug report - just please
modify `substitute-command' to add another arg that
provides for the behavior cited:
___
Please add an optional arg to `substitute-command-keys' that
changes the behavior. Please allow for these 3 possibilities:
1. Follow the current behavior (it could be the default):
show only the <remap> entry.
2. Show instead a key binding entry for each actual-key binding caused
by the remapping. IOW, expand <remap> into one or more actual-key
bindings. Handle remap of remap the same way. IOW, the output would
not show any <remap> entries, but would show only their expansions.
3. Show both the <remap> entries and their expansions, i.e., #1 + #2.
4. Alternatively, the <remap> entries could be links/buttons that when
followed expand to actual-key bindings (in place, within the same
overall list of bindings). One difference (advantage & disadvantage)
with this approach would be the order of the keys in the buffer.
Note that with the introduction of things like <remap> we are now
farther afield from the claimed behavior (and the intention) of
`substitute-command-keys':
\[COMMAND] is replaced by either a keystroke sequence that
invokes COMMAND, or "M-x COMMAND"
<remap>... is technically a "keystroke sequence" in one sense (it is a
key binding, at least), but in another sense it is not what the user
expects. When <remap> was added we more or less just punted wrt
`substitute-command-keys' - we didn't really finish the job.