> Quoting AVKuznetsov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> An order, in which key bindings are searched for, is not mentioned in
>> the
>> manual. I think, the first paragraph of the Key Binding section
>>
>>   There are several ways to change key bindings in NEdit.  The easiest
>> way
>> to add
>>   a new key binding in NEdit is to define a macro in Preferences ->
>> Default
>>   Settings -> Customize Menus -> Macro Menu.  However, if you want to
>> change
>>   existing bindings or add a significant number of new key bindings you
>> will need
>>   to do so via X resources.
>>
>> can be replaced by
>>
>>   There are several ways to change key bindings in NEdit.  The easiest
>> way
>> to
>>   add a new key binding in NEdit is to define a macro or a shell command
>> in
>>   Preferences -> Default Settings -> Customize Menus -> Shell, Macro or
>> Window
>>   Background Menus. However, if you want to change existing bindings or
>> add
>> a
>>   significant number of new key bindings you will need to do so via X
>> resources.
>>   X resources are searched for a key binding at first, then the Shell,
>> Macro and
>>   Window Background Menus are searched in the given order.
>>
>> My English is very bad so the text may (must?) be corrected by native
>> speaker.
>
> This might be clearer, but is it true? If there's a conflict between
> resource
> key settings and macro/shell menu keys, which is taken in preference? If
> more
> than one macro/shell menu entry have a particular key combination, which
> will
> be chosen?
>
Hi,

Yes, that is true. Being an experimantator I have investigated the problem.
When key is bound via X resources, menu accelerators are not used.
When nedit.rc is searched for accelerators , a first found key is used.
If you take a look at preference-file, you see the above order.
I made entries in Shell, Macro and Background menus bound to single key,
there are no conflicts, exessive bindings are ignored.

Alexey

-- 
NEdit Develop mailing list - [email protected]
http://www.nedit.org/mailman/listinfo/develop

Reply via email to