emacs-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: keypad-*-setup


From: Drew Adams
Subject: RE: keypad-*-setup
Date: Mon, 17 Sep 2007 15:30:09 -0700

> > 1. A nil ("No change (keep existing bindings)") value for the
> > setup options seems to be a no-op.... Am I reading this wrong?
>
> I don't really remember why I included that choice.
> Most likely it was a way to specify "use default bindings or whatever
> the user has changed them to".

Do you agree that it is a no-op, and can be removed (or am I missing
something)?

> > 2. Do we really need a separate `numeric' choice? Why not
> > always specify an explicit decimal-point? That is, why not get
> > rid of the value `numeric' ... and just use the version that
> > specifies a decimal-point character - it uses `.' as the default value,
> > which is the same as choosing the option value `numeric'.
>
> IIRC, the intention was to _somehow_ find the proper decimal point
> character from the language/regional environment settings.
> I probably didn't finish it because I don't know how to do that.

OK. Then I suggest that we remove the `numeric' choice. Even if someone did
implement what you suggest someday, that could be done by providing the
"right" default value for the explicit decimal-point character (which the
user could choose to override or not). Do you agree?

> > 3. Shouldn't `integerp' be `char-valid-p' in the test for the
> > value? :match (lambda (widget value) (integerp value)). In function
> > `keypad-setup', `char-valid-p' is used to test the character.
>
> That sounds right - but I don't remember.

Perhaps whoever is finalizing this patch for CVS etc. can try that. I think
it should be correct.

> In general I think your descriptions are very good, but OTOH I also
> think that some of the text is too verbose and elaborates too much on
> some of the trivial issues.

Feel free to propose specific reductions (as you did below).

> > Other keys that might be physically nearby, such as the keypad PF keys
> > (e.g. `<kp-f3>') and the keys labeled `/', `*', `-', `+', and `Enter',
> > are not considered part of the keypad, as the term is understood here.
>                                 ^numeric
>
> > This means that only some of the keys with names starting with `kp-'
> > are considered "keypad" keys in this section.  For example, the nearby
> > key labeled `/' is often named `<kp-divide>', but it is not a numeric
> > keypad key.  Be aware that in some other contexts any key whose Emacs
> > name starts with `kp-' might be considered a "keypad" key.  See, for
> > instance, (elisp) "Function Keys".
>
> This is true, but formally it doesn't add any information that the
> previous section didn't say implicitly - so it could be removed.

Again, feel free to remove anything.

The difficulty I saw was that the previous manual section, Function Keys,
speaks of keys such as <kp-divide> as "keypad" keys, but keypad.el is not
concerned with those. There are two different uses of the word "keypad" in
the manual, one refers to all keys with prefix `kp-'; the other refers only
to the 11 numeric keys 0-9 and `.'.

There needs, I think, to be some explanation of the terminology to avoid
confusion - the reader of the previous manual section will otherwise
misunderstand what is said in this section. Feel free to propose something
shorter to make this point.

> > The Shift key and the NumLock key modify the behavior of keys on the
> > numeric keypad.  The Shift key acts as usual.  The NumLock key is
> > usually near the keypad keys.  It acts similarly to the Caps Lock key,
> > but instead of toggling between uppercase and lowercase for the main
> > keyboard it toggles the keypad keys between two possible modes:
> > numeric and non-numeric.  Like the Caps Lock key, and unlike the Shift
> > key, NumLock is modal: hitting it once enters a mode that stays active
> > until you hit it again to change the mode.  NumLock is not a modifier
> > key: you do not hold it down while hitting other keys.
>
> I think most users will know that NumLock is modal - and that you
> don't have to hold it down - so this section could be more terse.
>
> E.g. something like this should be sufficient IMO:
>
> The Shift key and the NumLock key modify the behavior of keys on the
> numeric keypad.  The Shift key acts as usual.  The NumLock key toggles
> the keypad keys between two possible modes: numeric and non-numeric.

Sounds good to me.

Thx - Drew






reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]