323Re: [jasspa] CUA-Editor Emulation
- Feb 16, 2001Martin_Doering@... wrote:
>Provided that it works and does not conflict with the standard macros then
> Hello, Listers!
> I would like to develope an editor emulation for to use with me '00. I read
> the documentation, and it says, that the only emulation developed so far is
> the one for microemacs 3.8 from Steven Phillips (me3_8.emf).
> If I have a look at the code it seems, that there are just some minor
> changes in the editor behaviour. What I want to do is more, e.g. give
> CUA-keybindings (not just the C-v, C-x, C-C stuff), but also a more
> Motif/Windows/Mac like behaviour like C-z for undo C-a fo select all and
> exclusively using the cursor keys for navigation, so that other keys like
> C-p are free for other commands. Also I would like to use the ESC key for
> breaking an operation, not as a modifier key.
> All in all I think this is a very good idea and it also would be good for
> me '00, if some users, which come from windows (or use it) or are familiar
> with this keys could use me. The more people use it, the more people would
> support me and do additional developements on it.
> I don't want to be a missionary. I also don't want to discuss, if the
> emacs, vi or XXX keyset is better, or not. I just want to use the keyset
> our developers and me use this time. This is mostly the one of nedit. BUT:
> I like me '00 very much, because it is multi platform and it is very
> powerful. Also it is customizable, even the language is a bit crude (for a
> language fetishist like me ;-) And at all, it is very small - much
> smaller, than the big emacses, nedit or others.
> So I became the idea to develope a new editor emulation for it - don't know
> if this would ever become a part of the distribution, or not.
it will be distributed. One reason why we have not done this to date is
that we use Emacs for the Emacs bindings. However, one could completely
change the bindings for whatever target - in theory.
The only additional work that I can see that needs to be done is to disable
some of the Emacs bindings that are added on the hook functions. In this
case then a condition on the binding category would be required. i.e. we
could not assume some of the prefixes that we currently use. (for example
the hkc.emf has some local buffer bindings that would need to be altered).
The only other tricky area is the mouse. As you may(not) be aware most
of the mouse functionality is controlled from macros. The mouse behaviour
may need to be modified to be more in keeping with other target system emulations.
If somebody is prepared to make a start on the binding definitions then
we will be more than willing to support more esoteric problems with
prefixes and mouse bindings. Note that I have not volunteered for this
since faced with Microsoft tools such as Notepad, Wordpad or MS-DEV I have
severe problems with the keys because they are not Emacs - typically
causing these packages to break or do wierd things when I use Emacs bindings !!
>I would say it is a bit effort, but is do-able. You could probably get
> So - what do you think? Is this a good idea? There would be a need for to
> change some basic things like menues etc. E.g I don't know, if I would
> change the main editor menus and keysets, what I would do with the
> additional packages, like HTML etc. Mostly they can stay, like they are, I
> All in all I find me would be a good base for such thing and - I have to
> say that I find, that many things in me are done in a very modern and
> userfriendly way, like the user setup, the menus, the registry, all the osd
> part. It is done very well. It really would be a good base. And I would
> say, that the creators must have had some windowish or better GUI-like
> ideas in mind as they created it (me is not like other editors - it has not
> only menues, but all other kinds of browsers, lists, directories etc.).
> I once tried such conversation on JED, whose language slang I like more,
> but it was not so easy as I thought. For example JED does not have such
> thing like osd and does not have easy changable dialogs for to change mouse
> behaviour or such.
> What do you think: Would me be a good basis for me, or would you say, that
> it is too much efford? Or would you not like such things? Normally the user
> setup tells me, that there could be a wish, that there are some more
> emulations than now.
75-80% there with no help from us, but you will need more help once you
try and resolve the last few items.
There was a posting some time back requesting such a feature. I think
that people would use it if it was available - there are people in
my office that use ME for the line hilighting only and find it
difficult to navigate using the standard bindings.
I would point out that we are fairly open with new ideas etc. and are
more than willing to take them on board, provided that there is always
some sort of backwards compatibility and that it does not break any concepts
that are already in place. The real problem for us is time - so contributions
are always better than making a request for a feature - especially if
it is a feature that we will not use.
A number of you out there have come up with some exceedingly good ideas
which we have taken on board and extended. i.e. Detlef's original idea
of swapping the hilighting. This technique has been refined and included in
a number of highlighting schemes with great effect. The Windows console for
NT was another contribution.
I look forward to your contributions !!
> Martin Döring
- << Previous post in topic Next post in topic >>