There is no "prefix5" which is why it is not working. I have prototyped
additional prefixes which appears to work with mininal changes - so this
should be possible soon.
You could try the "A-C" bindings as follows:-
global-bind-key "yank" "A-C-v"
global-bind-key "kill-region" "A-C-x"
global-bind-key "copy-region" "A-C-c"
These keystokes might be a little more fluid than "C-1" as the
Ctrl-Alt keys are very close together (or use "Alt-Gr"). Could
give this a go ???
Detlef Groth wrote:
> Hello MicroEmacs users,
> I would like to use a fifth prefix-shortcut like:
> But ME shows me an error message for the prefix5 line.
> global-bind-key prefix5 "C-1"
> global-bind-key "yank" "C-1 v"
> global-bind-key "kill-region" "C-1 x"
> global-bind-key "copy-region" "C-1 c"
> Any suggestions ?
> Detlef groth
As an aside your "prefix" binding left me with some worrying
thoughts. Consider the current definition of "prefix4" defined
global-bind-key prefix4 "C-c"
Now lets say for instance that the user wanted to change "C-c" for
something else. i.e. "C-1". This would then cause problems as the
macro definitions always define their keystrokes in terms of the
raw characters, for example the next line in "me.emf" binds grep
global-bind-key grep "C-c g"
This has just used "prefix4", however it has not specified the
key binding in terms of "prefix4". Now if you try to re-bind
"prefix4" then in this partular instance "grep" will be bound
to "C-1 g". (Because the binding has already been installed
against the original prefix key). However there are alot of
macro files (i.e. hkXXXX.emf) which get loaded late i.e. after
the user.emf has been loaded. These might make reference to
"C-c" commands i.e. in hkc.emf we have:-
buffer-bind-key c-comment-line "C-c C-c"
If we have already have changed the "prefix4" binding then
we will expect "C-c C-c" to be bound to our new prefix
"C-1 C-c" - which is not the case. Ideally this macro binding
should be expressed in terms of it's prefix rather than
the literal value of the 'expected' prefix. i.e.
buffer-bind-key c-comment-line "prefix4 C-c"
This would then make the macro definitions more resilent
to 'unexpected' binding changes. This does have some
unpleasent side effects as some of the keys appear in the
OSD help pages i.e. on the help page then we have
osd .osd.c-help 7 "" " C-c C-c - Comment out current line"
This would no longer apply, writing:-
osd .osd.c-help 7 "" " prefix4 C-c - Comment out current line"
is deeply unpleasent. The only thing that you could do
is ask for a return on the key bindinging for prefix4
(which is not currently available). Lets assume we
introduced a &kstroke macro that would return the literal
key stroke (this is the opposite of &kbind), but with an
expanded prefix, we could then re-write the OSD as:-
osd .osd.c-help 7 "" &spr " %s - Comment out current line" &kstroke c-comment-line
This would then get around the problem.
This is probably further than I wanted to go with this - but
does hilight a current problem. - The question is "Is it really
worth sorting out ??"
Jon Green J.D.Naughton-Green
SAMSUNG Electronics Ltd
Samsung Electronics Research Institute (Audio / Visual Labs)
This is an unmoderated list. JASSPA is not responsible for the content of
any material posted to this list.