GNU bug report logs - #40725
27.0.91; Tutorial reports false positive key rebindings

Previous Next

Full log

Message #14 received at 40725 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
To: "Basil L. Contovounesios" <contovob <at> tcd.ie>
Cc: 40725 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#40725: 27.0.91; Tutorial reports false positive key rebindings
Date: Tue, 21 Apr 2020 16:39:38 +0300

> From: "Basil L. Contovounesios" <contovob <at> tcd.ie>
> Cc: 40725 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
> Date: Mon, 20 Apr 2020 23:19:46 +0100
> 
> The function in question, tutorial--find-changed-keys, is only ever
> passed the defconst tutorial--default-keys as argument.

Yes, and one of the aspects I thought about was whether this change
could make use less future-proof, if more keys are added.

> In fact, the tutorial doesn't mention C-c at all, but apparently
> it's included in tutorial--default-keys just because it's an
> otherwise common prefix.

AFAIU from the code, the main consideration with C-c is when the user
turns on the CUA mode, not because it's a common prefix.  So maybe we
should narrow the test to only make sure CUA rebindings get caught?

> > How do we distinguish the case where _all_ of the subcommands were
> > rebound, for example?
> 
> I don't think the current logic tries to handle that either, does it?

Well, we are trying to improve the current logic, aren't we?

> > Also, don't we have some prefixes that for the purposes of the
> > tutorial must not have _any_ of its subcommands rebound?
> 
> Hm, I don't know.  Did you have any examples in mind?  The only prefixes
> I see used in the tutorial are C-x, C-h, and Meta/ESC.
> 
> AFAICT if a command-binding pair isn't listed in tutorial--default-keys,
> then C-h t won't complain about it being rebound.  For example, you can
> rebind C-x k (which IS mentioned in the tutorial) and C-h t won't notice
> at all.

So maybe we should add that, to make the test more thorough?

> I can open another bug report for extending tutorial--default-keys to
> detect changes to all default key bindings used in the tutorial, but for
> now I think the proposed patch fixes the issue at hand without making
> things worse.

I just want to make sure we don't do anything that could cause subtle
problems.  Bugs while reading the tutorial are the worst kind, for
obvious reasons.

Thanks.

Previous Next

GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.