Re: Do we need to bind to both RET and <return> variants?

[Kaushal Modi]

On Wed, Jan 23, 2019 at 5:53 PM Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca>
wrote:

>
> No, if you don't care about the difference, then bind only RET (which
> will also apply to `return` because `return` is remapped to RET if
> there's no binding specifically for it).
>

But it did not work that way for me.

Earlier I did not have a S-<return> binding in my config. So once the
binding changed to S-RET (in org-mode-map) upstream in Org, S-<return>
stopped working for me altogether (Emacs GUI).

Then C-h k and typing S-<return> should say interpret that as just RET:

    RET (translated from <S-return>) runs the command
modi/org-return-no-indent

I have bound modi/org-return-no-indent to C-m.

So to fix this I had to add the <return> bindings manually to my config:

    (bind-keys
     :map org-mode-map
     :filter (org-at-table-p)
     ("S-<return>" . org-table-copy-down))

    ;; https://lists.gnu.org/r/emacs-orgmode/2019-01/msg00312.html
    ;; Add the <return> variant of bindings so that they work on Emacs
    ;; GUI too.
    (bind-keys
     :map org-mode-map
     ("M-S-<return>" . org-insert-todo-heading)
     ("ESC S-<return>" . org-insert-todo-heading)
     ("M-<return>" . org-meta-return)
     ("ESC <return>" . org-meta-return))

Any tips on what could be causing S-<return> to be auto-translated to just
RET, and not use the upstream Org source defined S-RET binding?