Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!sun-barr!texsun!pitstop!sundc!seismo!uunet!mcvax!ukc!acorn!steve From: steve@acorn.co.uk (Steve "Daffy" Hunt) Newsgroups: comp.sys.next Subject: Re: Various comments/questions/suggestions Message-ID: <770@acorn.co.uk> Date: 14 May 89 21:41:06 GMT References: <238@quartz.atexnet.UUCP> Reply-To: steve@acorn.UUCP (Steve "Daffy" Hunt) Organization: Acorn Computers Ltd, Cambridge, England Lines: 36 In article wsd@cs.brown.edu writes: >In article <238@quartz.atexnet.UUCP> rose@atexnet.UUCP (Robert Rose) writes: [...] > > 2)User settable keybindings. I want to be able to make everything > answer to emacs commands (as best as possible). I'll do the work if > applications let the keys be rebound. Even X let's you do that! > >What do you mean? As far as I know (which isn't much), X let's you >globally redefine keys, but how does one set which keys do what in >different applications? If you want everything to look like emacs, >then use emacs for everything (I do!). Nooooo! Way off beam... The X Toolkit's translation mechanism lets the user specify key bindings (or more accurately event bindings, because you can rebind mouse buttons and motion etc too) on a specific basis (naming one particular widget in a particular application) or a general basis (say, all the Text widgets in a particular application) or globally (all the Text widgets in all applications). Or anything in between, like all the Text widgets in some subwindow of a particular application. Mind you, how useful this all is depends on how well thought out the available translations are, and how well thought out the hierarchical naming scheme for all those widgets is. That depends on the widget writer and the application writer. Documenting it is a bit of a nightmare too. NB: Non-Xt programs are a different matter. Steve. PS: Yes, I use Emacs for everything, too. Do people really use their mouse for anything more important than selecting which vt100 emulator to type at? :-)