From xemacs-m  Sat May 17 06:03:13 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 GAA02287
	for <xemacs-beta@xemacs.org>; Sat, 17 May 1997 06:03:12 -0500 (CDT)
Received: (from hniksic@localhost)
          by jagor.srce.hr (8.8.5/8.8.4)
	  id NAA16671; Sat, 17 May 1997 13:03:11 +0200 (MET DST)
To: 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>
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
From: Hrvoje Niksic <hniksic@srce.hr>
Date: 17 May 1997 13:03:11 +0200
In-Reply-To: Gary.Foster@Corp.Sun.COM's message of 16 May 1997 16:34:21 -0700
Message-ID: <kighgg25pjk.fsf@jagor.srce.hr>
Lines: 40
X-Mailer: Gnus v5.4.52/XEmacs 19.15

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.

> And I've taken great pains to take long painful look at designing the
> hook such that it's NOT incompatible.  It took me something like three 
> lines of code that I added to cc-mode to make it take advantage of
> it.  Does that sound incompatible to you?

It's not about "sounding" incompatible.  It *is* incompatible.  Such
thing doesn't exist in GNU Emacs, or in earlier XEmacs versions.

> Well, be that as it may... the translation hacks are just
> that... hacks.  It's time to stop hacking at it and fix it for real.

But so is your solution, it seems to me.

> Please *try* out what I've posted and give it a good shakedown before
> passing judgement.  I've given it a lot of thought and a lot of
> consideration and I'd take it very kindly if you'd at least give it a
> good solid perusal and give me real, honest feedback.  It's time we
> separated the emotions from the issues and got on with fixing it.

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?

-- 
Hrvoje Niksic <hniksic@srce.hr> | Student at FER Zagreb, Croatia
--------------------------------+--------------------------------
"Psychos _do not_ explode when sunlight hits them."

