Re: We need unbind function (was Re: [PATCHES] awaiting...)
* On 2004.05.26, in <20040526211705.GA21771@xxxxxxx>,
* "Alain Bench" <veronatif@xxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > Include dgc's excellent "unbind" patch. (This provides the most
> > intuitive UI (and many changes))
>
> What does it do? Why was it rejected?
http://home.uchicago.edu/~dgc/mutt/#unbind
It implements "unbind x y" as an alternative to "bind x y noop", but
with the addition of allowing '*' as a wildcard for 'x' or for 'y'.
Likewise "unmacro".
I don't know why it was rejected. I don't recall any particular
discussion of it; it just didn't go in, and I didn't press for it to go
in.
I don't think it's all that special a patch, although (as Tamo mentions)
it is probably a more intuitive syntax to most users. I wrote it because
once upon a time, there was some significant demand for this -- I don't
use it, myself. These days the preference is for an "unbind" that
removes all keymap binding entries for a key, but in general I haven't
really understood why. This thread makes a fair point, though, and I can
now understand finding this function useful.
(It's perhaps worth noting that "unbind index *" does in fact remove
bindings for all keysyms, rather than simply rebind them to noop. But an
individual key unbind simply rebinds to noop.)
So.. my unbind patch is not precisely what is wanted here, but it
probably wouldn't take a lot of work to make it so.
--
-D. dgc@xxxxxxxxxxxx NSIT::ENSS
No money, no book. No book, no study. No study, no pass.
No pass, no graduate. No graduate, no job. No job, no money.
T h e U n i v e r s i t y o f C h i c a g o