From xemacs-m  Sat May 17 06:56:17 1997
Received: from martigny.ai.mit.edu (martigny.ai.mit.edu [18.43.0.152])
	by xemacs.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id GAA04220
	for <xemacs-beta@xemacs.org>; Sat, 17 May 1997 06:56:17 -0500 (CDT)
Received: from berne.ai.mit.edu by martigny.ai.mit.edu with SMTP
	(1.40.112.8/16.2) id AA224050176; Sat, 17 May 1997 07:56:16 -0400
From: Bill Dubuque <wgd@martigny.ai.mit.edu>
Message-Id: <199705171156.AA224050176@martigny.ai.mit.edu>
Received: by berne.ai.mit.edu
	(1.40.112.8/16.2) id AA159700176; Sat, 17 May 1997 07:56:16 -0400
Date: Sat, 17 May 1997 07:56:16 -0400
To: hniksic@srce.hr
Cc: xemacs-beta@xemacs.org
In-Reply-To: <kighgg25pjk.fsf@jagor.srce.hr> (message from Hrvoje Niksic on 17
	May 1997 13:03:11 +0200)
Subject: Re: DEL patch, as promised.

Hrvoje Niksic <hniksic@srce.hr> wrote:
| 
| Gary.Foster@Corp.Sun.COM (Gary D. Foster) writes:
| 
| > If you WANT to write your own electric-delete function, you go ahead
| > and do so just as you normally would have done before.  NOTHING
| > changes at all.  The only thing that changes is that instead of doing
| > a "define-key" or whatever to bind it, you use the hook to bind it.
| 
| That's what I'd call a horrible and incompatible change.  In Emacs you
| define keys with `define-key'.  But you want everyone to stop using
| that for delete, and use your hook instead.
| 
| It looks like jumping from kludge to kludge.

Hear, hear!  

Any solution that circumvents the key-binding abstraction 
is asking for big trouble.

The conceptually correct solution is clearly to have virtual
keysyms for keys that delete forward and backward. 

-Bill Dubuque

