Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

326Re: [jasspa] CUA-Editor Emulation

Expand Messages
  • Steven Phillips
    Feb 19, 2001
    • 0 Attachment

      This is harder than it may first appear, following is a list of issues that
      need to be addressed:

      High priority
      Ability to remove all default bindings (internal)
      Ability to rebind interrupt (C-g) key (horrible internal)
      Configure ME to run in windows mode (macro - Emulate = windows?)
      Disable the setup of various global-bindings in me.emf (macro)
      Change the buffer specific bindings to windows ones (macro)
      Change the Main menu to show correct bindings (macro)
      Change the buffer help pages (macro)
      Change or add docs (documentation)

      Are there any issues I've missed? Please consider offer possible emulations.

      The first 5 are musts, the next 2 are bordering on musts (what do you
      think??) and documentation is documentation.

      The first 2 items are not possible in the current release, ME must be
      changed. The 3 is already there. The next 4 can be done, but how? this will
      greatly impact the macros and their maintainability.

      Given this I propose that Jasspa do a feasibility study first to determine
      an expectable approach to these problems. Once a solution has been agreed
      on, we can release the new version and the Emulation can then be created by
      whoever wishes to.

      ----- Original Message -----
      From: "Jon Green" <jnaught@...>
      To: <jasspa@yahoogroups.com>
      Sent: Friday, February 16, 2001 4:24 PM
      Subject: Re: [jasspa] CUA-Editor Emulation

      Martin_Doering@... wrote:
      > Hello, Listers!
      > I would like to develope an editor emulation for to use with me '00. I
      > the documentation, and it says, that the only emulation developed so far
      > 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
      > if this would ever become a part of the distribution, or not.

      Provided that it works and does not conflict with the standard macros then
      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

      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

      > 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
      > think.
      > 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
      > 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
      > 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
      > 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
      > setup tells me, that there could be a wish, that there are some more
      > emulations than now.

      I would say it is a bit effort, but is do-able. You could probably get
      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
      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


      This is an unmoderated list. JASSPA is not responsible for the content of

      any material posted to this list.
    • Show all 8 messages in this topic