From xemacs-m  Sun May 18 16:55:41 1997
Received: from jagor.srce.hr (hniksic@jagor.srce.hr [161.53.2.130])
	by xemacs.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id QAA11628
	for <xemacs-beta@xemacs.org>; Sun, 18 May 1997 16:55:40 -0500 (CDT)
Received: (from hniksic@localhost)
          by jagor.srce.hr (8.8.5/8.8.4)
	  id XAA02371; Sun, 18 May 1997 23:55:22 +0200 (MET DST)
To: Gary.Foster@Corp.Sun.COM (Gary D. Foster)
Cc: XEmacs Developers <xemacs-beta@xemacs.org>
Subject: Re: DEL patch, as promised.
References: <bciaflv2kuv.fsf@corp.Sun.COM> <kigiv0jrthb.fsf@jagor.srce.hr> <bci67wj2dqa.fsf@corp.Sun.COM> <kighgg25pjk.fsf@jagor.srce.hr> <bcihgg01obw.fsf@corp.Sun.COM>
X-Save-Project-Gutenberg: <URL:http://www.promo.net/pg/nl/pgny_nov96.html>
X-Attribution: Hrv
X-Face: Mie8:rOV<\c/~z{s.X4A{!?vY7{drJ([U]0O=W/<W*SMo/Mv:58:*_y~ki>xDi&N7XG
        KV^$k0m3Oe/)'e%3=$PCR&3ITUXH,cK>]bci&<qQ>Ff%x_>1`T(+M2Gg/fgndU%k*ft
        [(7._6e0n-V%|%'[c|q:;}td$#INd+;?!-V=c8Pqf}3J
X-Horoscope: 
   Beware of your wonderful pet giraffe bearing a small bomb.  Your
   tetrodotoxin will be turning in the next 4 or 9 minutes.  Don't
   talk to your plants today.  Loving your alien now will turn out to
   be futile after a few days.  You'll never be tired.
From: Hrvoje Niksic <hniksic@srce.hr>
Date: 18 May 1997 23:55:21 +0200
In-Reply-To: Gary.Foster@Corp.Sun.COM's message of 18 May 1997 14:07:31 -0700
Message-ID: <kig2074a1iu.fsf@jagor.srce.hr>
Lines: 56
X-Mailer: Gnus v5.4.52/XEmacs 20.2

Gary.Foster@Corp.Sun.COM (Gary D. Foster) writes:

> > You misunderstand.  I have no doubt that your solution *works*.  Yes,
> > with both my and your setup.  But are you really ready to convince the
> > Lisp writers out there to use `define-key' for all keys but one?
> 
> No, actually *YOU* misunderstand.

When I said that you misunderstand, I didn't mean to get personal, but
to specific.  On the other hand, I think I understand your proposal
well, as I will demonstrate.

> define-key STILL works in this setup.  You can still be (in my
> opinion) a bad citizen and (define-key...) to your heart's content
> and it will *work* just like it does now.

Yes, I know that.  Why haven't you read the article you reply to?
Citing:

    I have no doubt that your solution *works*.
    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

What I am arguing against is the fact that your solution regards the
`define-key' method as deprecated, offering a new and incompatible
replacement for it (as long as one wants to be a decent citizen, of
course).  For me, it is not a good design -- you replace one special
case with another.  The latter works, yes, but it's still a hack.

> I would never presume to break (define-key) behavior.

I know you wouldn't.  But you would (and do) proclaim it bad, and
offer a replacement -- for this specific case.  It might be better if
you sought for a replacement within the existing scheme.

> Please point out to me behavior that my patch takes AWAY from you
> that is critical to your functions...

I said that your patch works, and will repeat it again, if needed.
You seem to think that I attack its functionality.  I don't.  It's the 
Lisp rules that we will have to require our programmers to abide by
that I don't like.  Yes, I know that anyone who wants it will be able
to use `define-key'.  But I'd rather that they can keep using
`define-key' (with different semantics perhaps), but that it starts
working in the backspace/delete case.

> Oh, I might add that I made another change ... I thought it might be
> a good idea (after listening to some other people's suggestions) to
> use the x-keysym-on-keyboard-p function to check for the presence of
> a backspace key...

It's a good idea, yes.

-- 
Hrvoje Niksic <hniksic@srce.hr> | Student at FER Zagreb, Croatia
--------------------------------+--------------------------------
The end of the world is coming...  SAVE YOUR BUFFERS!

