RE: Re: Ilisp FSF key binding changes

Andreas/Hannu,

I changed some of the ilisp key bindings locally and played around with
the 3-control key sequences and I think I'm starting to see your point.
Since you're trying out the bindings, I would like your opinion (as well
as feedback from others) on how the other bindings might be changed for
maximum ease-of-use. At the moment (with the changes that I've checked
into cvs), the convention is:

"C-c C-key1 key2" (for most action bindings - i.e.-- "C-c C-j n" for
eval-next-sexp-lisp)
"C-c C-key1 C-key2" (for action-and-go bindings - i.e.-- "C-c C-j C-n"
for eval-next-sexp-and-go-lisp)

If I change the bindings as you suggest, most commands will now be:

"C-c C-key1 C-key2" (i.e.-- "C-c C-j C-n" for eval-next-sexp-lisp)

For the action-and-go bindings, there are a number of alternatives. Here
are the ones I've considered:

1. "C-c C-key1 key2" (this requires a "release") i.e.-- "C-c C-j n" for
eval-next-sexp-and-go-lisp
2. "C-c C-key1 C-c C-key2" (this requires a 4th control key sequence and
would require some changes to existing bindings that use "c" as key2)
i.e.-- "C-c C-j C-c C-n" for eval-next-sexp-and-go-lisp. Some other
control-key sequence could be used in place of C-c for the 3rd key;
however, C-c is probably a reasonable choice.
3. "C-c C-key1 M-key2" (this requires a change of modifier keys) i.e.--
"C-c C-j M-n" for eval-next-sexp-and-go-lisp

What do you feel is the easiest sequence to use for the action-and-go
commands if we do decide to change the bindings?

--
Bill Clementson



-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: If flattening out C++ or Java
code to make your application fit in a relational database is painful, 
don't do it! Check out ObjectStore. Now part of Progress Software.
http://www.objectstore.net/sourceforge