X-Authentication-Warning:	delorie.com: mail set sender to geda-user-bounces using -f
X-Recipient:	geda-user AT delorie DOT com
Date:	Sun, 13 Sep 2015 12:17:53 +0200 (CEST)
X-X-Sender:	igor2 AT igor2priv
To:	geda-user AT delorie DOT com
X-Debug:	to=geda-user AT delorie DOT com from="gedau AT igor2 DOT repo DOT hu"
From:	gedau AT igor2 DOT repo DOT hu
Subject:	[geda-user] off-topic: key bindings
Message-ID:	<alpine.DEB.2.00.1509131209260.6924@igor2priv>
User-Agent:	Alpine 2.00 (DEB 1167 2008-08-23)
MIME-Version:	1.0
Reply-To:	geda-user AT delorie DOT com

Hi all,

it's kind of off-topic, as it won't affect any geda tool or pcb or 
pcb-rnd, but I was wondering... We had debates on this list about key 
bindings in gschem vs. key bindings in pcb. I generally prefer how gschem 
does this, I find those key combinations easier to remembee. However, I 
also admit there are (ugly, but) de facto standard key combinations users 
want to see in apps, like ctrl+z for undo.

I was thinking about how to resolve this conflict between modifiers and 
multi key stroke combinations in an app I am going to write later.

I figured the expectated key combinations of the modifier-based map never 
start with an alnum character without a modifier. This makes the following 
simple policy feasible:

1. if the first key is with a modifier, it is a single-stroke hotkey (e.g. 
ctrl+z or ctrl+s)

2. if the first key is not alnum, it is a single-stroke hotkey (e.g. arrow 
keys, escape, F1, enter, etc.)

3. if the first key is alnum without a modifier, it's the first character 
of a multi-stroke command

Rule 3 removes 36 keys from the single-stroke world but makes it possible 
to use best of both worlds without collision.

Any thoughts/feedback are welcome.

Regards,

Igor2

- Raw text -