Hi, > On Aug 9, 2016, at 11:31 PM, Nicolai Hess <nicolaih...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > 2016-08-09 22:53 GMT+02:00 Tudor Girba <tu...@tudorgirba.com>: > Hi, > > > On Aug 9, 2016, at 10:48 PM, Nicolai Hess <nicolaih...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > 2016-08-09 18:12 GMT+02:00 Tudor Girba <tu...@tudorgirba.com>: > > Hi, > > > > > > > > Hey Doru, > > > about what "two issues" are we talking? My only issue for now is, > > > what shortcut shold we use for moving the cursor forward/backward word. > > > Even if we introduce a new layer, at some point in time you need to > > > define: If the user types the CTRL+LEFT -key, even if we call it > > > differently, some action happens, dive-out or move-backward-word ? > > > At the moment (on windows) you can use both to move word-by-word: > > > ctrl+left/right and alt+left/right, because this is how it is defined in > > > rubrics action/cmdaction map. > > > > > > If we want to clean this up and use the kmdispatcher registration, I > > > think we don't want to use both ctr and alt again, right? > > > So, someone has to take the decision. > > > I myself would prefer > > > ctrl+left/right because this is what (all) many other programs are using > > > on windows. Fine. But recently Spotter changed its > > > dive in / dive out shortcut to use ctrl+left/right. > > > Therefor I am asking you, why, and whether we want to keep it or not. If > > > we want to keep it, we may > > > - just overwrite the binding for the textfield -> not good, I think, you > > > wouldn't be able to do word-by-word movements in the textfield anymore > > > - overwrite the binding and use another binding for word-by-word moving, > > > but just in spotters text field > > > Or we revert that change and use the old shortcuts again. > > > (And what to use for mac and linux?) > > > > > > but I am getting really tired of asking, and will do something else > > > instead. > > > > The short answer: we will override the keybinding in the text morph for > > now. This will mean that we cannot move word by word in the text field > > using #control, but it will be consistent with all other platforms. Could > > you open an issue for this, please? > > > > > > consistens on all platforms may not be the expectation for all users. Some > > users only working on a windows platform may want to have consistent > > behavior for all tools (applications). > > Well, you wanted a decision :). > > > > On top of that, we will externalize all GTSpotter shortcuts through > > settings: > > https://pharo.fogbugz.com/f/cases/18455/Spotter-shortcuts-should-be-externalized-as-settings > > > > I really don't know why that. > > Because we do not have a generic KMDispatcher mechanism :). > > yes and it does not make much sense as not all shortcuts are handled by the > kmdispatcher, thats why cleaning this > up and I think it would be better to do this instead of implementing yet > another only-for-this-tool solution.
Ok. What should I do? > > We don't need a way to make Spotter shortcuts configurable, but *all* > > shortcuts. > > That is why I try to move all shortcut definitions to the kmdispatcher, but > > it yet again took 2 month just to discuss what shortcut to use for cursor > > movement. > > I am not sure I understand. Was this me that stalled the discussion? If yes, > it was not intentional. Is there anything I can do about this subject? > > The whole discussion, the me: "hey, what shortcut to use?" you:"hey we have a > great idea, just let us add some new layers" :( I think I miss something because I do not see how the layers have anything to do with the cursor movement. Or do you mean for diving in Spotter? I still think that the layers idea is a relevant one and does not conflict with anything we talked about here. In any case, I did not mean to confuse anyone. Please take the lead concerning the KMDispatcher and I can review if you want. Doru > Cheers, > Doru > > > > > > Long answer: As explained before, the shortcut changed in the process of > > making all shortcuts uniform when Guille introduced #meta instead of > > #command (like it was before). The thing is that currently: > > - #command means #alt on Win and #command on Mac, and > > - #meta means #control on Win and #command on Mac. > > > > But, #command should be a low level key, not a portable one. It should not > > have a meaning on Windows, because the key does not exist on that platform. > > > > Moving to make keybindings uniform is a good thing, but only having #meta > > is not enough for situation like the one you mention. That is why I am > > proposing to introduce a #secondaryMeta as a platform-independent modifier > > that would mean #alt on Win and #control on Mac. We could use that one more > > consistently. Is this a better explanation? > > > > Cheers, > > Doru > > > > > > -- > > www.tudorgirba.com > > www.feenk.com > > > > "Presenting is storytelling." > > -- > www.tudorgirba.com > www.feenk.com > > "One cannot do more than one can do." -- www.tudorgirba.com www.feenk.com "When people care, great things can happen."
