Re: [bongo-patches] Re: Add immediate seek bindings: `F', `B', `M-F', `M-B', `C-M-F', `C-M-B'

[Daniel Brockman]

address@hidden (Daniel Jensen) writes:

> Daniel Brockman <address@hidden> writes:
>
>> address@hidden (Daniel Jensen) writes:
>>
>>> You need to use [?\C-\S-b], [?\C-\S-f], [?\C-\M-\S-b]
>>> and [?\C-\M-\S-f].
>>
>> Oh, I didn't know that.  I can't believe I didn't test it.
>> Maybe I just tested the new `s C-M-f' binding (et al.) and
>> thought I tested `C-M-F'.
>
> I think Emacs helpfully translates away the shift modifier when there is
> no binding for it. So maybe that's how you got the expected result, only
> because the wrong key was bound and then translated to.

Maybe that could happen if I had actually managed to bind
the right key in the first place, which is apparently not
possible given that I was using "\C-\M-F" which is `equal'
to "\C-\M-f".  Pretty nice cover, though --- thanks. :-)

>> However, [?\C-B] and [?\C-M-B] do seem to work, unless I'm
>> missing something again.  Can you confirm that?
>
> [?\C-B] is the same as [?\C-b].

I was missing something again.

> Note that it's ^B, the ASCII character.

Right, right.  I figured `?\C-B' would be short for `?\C-\S-b'.
I should have tried just evaluating the expressions. :-)

> [?\C-M-B] is not valid, I think you mean [?\C-\M-B].
> But again, it is the same as [?\C-\M-b].

Again, right you are.

I will install a fix for this.


Thank you very much,

-- 
Daniel Brockman <address@hidden>