Re: kbd vs read-key-sequence

[Juanma Barranquero]

On 3/2/07, Stefan Monnier <address@hidden> wrote:

> Oh, so I misunderstood the original report: read-key-sequence does not
> return 186, but 2234, i.e. it's working correctly.

Yes. On my first message I wasn't talking about º, but C-M-º, and

 (event-basic-type (aref (read-key-sequence "") 0)) => 186

when you type C-M-º (but 2234 when you type º).

> The fix for it is to change w32 so that it does the decoding earlier, as is
> done in X, rather than via encoded-kb.

Before the release?

It is not the most serious of bugs, but it is a bug nonetheless that:

 (global-set-key (kbd "C-M-º") 'my-command)
 M-x describe-key RET C-M-º => "C-M-º is undefined"

            Juanma