[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: C-q vs documentation
From: |
Stefan Monnier |
Subject: |
Re: C-q vs documentation |
Date: |
Mon, 24 Mar 2003 10:06:44 -0500 |
> Does this patch fix it?
>
> *** subr.el.~1.344.~ Mon Mar 17 13:59:36 2003
> --- subr.el Sat Mar 22 09:03:07 2003
> ***************
> *** 1112,1118 ****
> (setq char (aref translated 0)))))
> (cond ((null char))
> ((not (integerp char))
> ! (setq unread-command-events (listify-key-sequence
> (this-single-command-raw-keys))
> done t))
> ((/= (logand char ?\M-\^@) 0)
> ;; Turn a meta-character into a character with the 0200 bit set.
> --- 1112,1118 ----
> (setq char (aref translated 0)))))
> (cond ((null char))
> ((not (integerp char))
> ! (setq unread-command-events (list char)
> done t))
> ((/= (logand char ?\M-\^@) 0)
> ;; Turn a meta-character into a character with the 0200 bit set.
The reason why I used this-single-command-raw-keys is because CHAR has
already been through key-translation-map, so pushing it back onto
the unread-command-events will cause it to go through key-translation-map
a second time, which can result in incorrect results.
E.g. if you use key-translation-map to switch two keys.
Stefan
- C-q vs documentation, Marco Parrone, 2003/03/20
- Re: C-q vs documentation, Richard Stallman, 2003/03/22
- Re: C-q vs documentation,
Stefan Monnier <=
- Re: C-q vs documentation, Marco Parrone, 2003/03/24
- Re: C-q vs documentation, Richard Stallman, 2003/03/24
- Re: C-q vs documentation, Stefan Monnier, 2003/03/24
- Re: C-q vs documentation, Richard Stallman, 2003/03/25
- Re: C-q vs documentation, Stefan Monnier, 2003/03/26
- Re: C-q vs documentation, Richard Stallman, 2003/03/26
- Re: C-q vs documentation, Stefan Monnier, 2003/03/27