Re: LYNX-DEV wishlist item

[Laura Eaves]

> Date: Thu, 13 Nov 1997 08:41:21 -0500 (EST)
> From: Foteos Macrides <address@hidden>
>...
>       That was the point of my suggestion to map an explicit key
> in LYEditmap.c.  It normally has ^V as a dead key.  In the Lynx271f
> code for SSL, I added an LYE_LINKN command, mapped it to ^V, and added
> an LYReverseKeymap() function for getting the keyboard key mapped
> to any LYK_foo command, so that I can descend into the form_getstr()
> loop and make sure it's using actual maps, rather than the distribution
> defaults of necessity.  I also tweaked LYgetstr() to still treat
> LYE_LINKN as a dead key.
>
>       I don't think ^V should be considered a "safe" control character
> for either LYE_foo or LYK_foo command maps, because it's intercepted
> under some circumstances, and may actually be used externally.  That's
> why you have to enter it twice when using Lynx with Unix curses via a
> telnet login, but that isn't true in all cases.  I'm still thinking
> about other control characters that are really "safe", and presently
> mapped as synonyms in LYEditmap.c, so that ^V can stay a dead key as
> far as Lynx is concerned.

I think there's probably no control character that is safe in all
contexts.  Telnet's escape char can be changed by the user -- and
in fact I had to change it as ^] is intercepted by my terminal emulator.
I had to take care not to choose a char that is used by lynx
(such as ^A or ^E).

>       As far as having a control key LYE_foo mapping for allowing
> any LYK_foo command in form text fields, rather than just for conversion
> to LYK_F_LINK_NUM, I'm not wild about that for a variety of reasons, but
> if that's done in the devel code, you definitely need a prompt as well
> if the control key stays ^V, because depending on the context you may
> or may not need two, and if you don't, you will end up changing the
> parser unintentionally, whereas if you have a prompt, if the first ^V
> dosn't invoke it, you know you need to enter ^V again.

I would be interested in hearing some of your reasons for not
wanting to support general commands in line edit mode.
I'm  using hte patch in my private version of lynx and really like it
so far.

As for the prompt, one reason I didn't try (at least not yet) to print one
is that sometimes line edit mode is invoked for entering text on the status
line, and would therefore be overwritten by the prompt.
But now that I think of it, this may not be a problem.

Thanks for your input.
--le
;
; To UNSUBSCRIBE:  Send a mail message to address@hidden
;                  with "unsubscribe lynx-dev" (without the
;                  quotation marks) on a line by itself.
;