Re: Key-binding without minor mode!

[Phillip Lord]

Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> writes:

>> But if the major-mode defines binds to [tab] then it will override the
>> minor mode.
>
> Indeed.  It might be a bug in the major-mode, tho (which manifests
> for example under ttys where the TAB key sends a \t rather than a `tab').

Oh, dear, yes. So binding to [tab] in my minor mode is a mistake. I need
to bind to both \t and [tab]. If I bind to just \t then a major mode can
override this by binding [tab]. If I bind, though, to just [tab] then I
have no binding in tty.


>
>> I think I have no choice but to handle tab explicitly. Is [tab] the only
>> key that works like this?
>
> No.  What you're trying to do is inherently tricky/fiddly/unreliable
> because Emacs's key-binding infrastructure is not designed for that.
>

Yep. I've ended up with this. I've had to do something similar for
return which does the same thing.


(defun pabbrev-get-previous-binding ()
  "Show the binding of tab if pabbrev were not active.
The command `pabbrev-show-previous-binding' prints this out."
  (let ((pabbrev-mode nil))
    (let ((tckv
           (if pabbrev-xemacs-p
               (this-command-keys)
             (this-command-keys-vector))))
      (cond
       ((or (equal tckv [tab]) 
            (equal tckv [9]))
        (or (key-binding [tab]) (key-binding "\t")))
       ((or (equal tckv [return])
            (equal tckv [32]))
        (or (key-binding [return]) (key-binding "\n")))
       (t
        (key-binding tckv))))))


> You might want to report a bug asking for some feature that lets you do
> what you want (which I suspect is something like "let my command
> delegate to the next command bound to this key").

Will do!

Phil