Re: Command remapping and the delete-frame problem.

[Kim F. Storm]

Earlier today, I wrote:
> 
> Are you now saying that remapping should have been implemented
> using a specific `command' prefix like this: 
> 
>         (define-key map [command command1] 'command2)
> 
> I can see that this is better than the current implementation as it
> makes a clear destinction (in the keymaps) between commands and other
> symbols like those used on the menu-bar, and a few symbols which are
> both commands and keys (e.g. `undo').
> 
> All of this makes a lot of sense -- should I go back and change the
> implementation to use an explicit `command' prefix for command
> remapping?

Actually, I went ahead an made the changes in a fully transparent way.
This means that internally, remapping command FOO to BAR is stored as
a binding for [command FOO], i.e. the "event" `command' is bound to a 
keymap in which FOO is mapped to BAR.

But the interface to define-key, lookup-key and key-binding hasn't
changed.  They just take FOO as the KEY argument - which is still an
unambuguous way to represent command remapping, as those functions
don't otherwise accept a symbol as the KEY argument.  

The changes are very small, so I expect to commit them later this
evening.

-- 
Kim F. Storm <address@hidden> http://www.cua.dk