Re: make-repeat-command/toggle functions

Uwe Brauer writes: No, I understood the example fine. Exactly, it's a matter of taste. If you find this kind of thing convenient in *your* workflow, you should be able to get XEmacs to do it, conveniently. Since it defines a new command and *you* bind it to a keystroke, it's nobody else's business. And since there are similar features (the message-mode function on C-a, GNU Emacs's new C-l functionality), evidently somebody likes this style of UI. Making it easier to define is perhaps a service to those users. But it's not to my taste, so I wonder. For example, for your my-home command, would (defun my-home () (interactive) (cond ((bolp) (beginning-of-buffer)) ((looking-back "\\s-*" (point-at-bol)) (beginning-of-line)) (t (back-to-indentation)))) be better, about the same, or worse than the version you posted? (The difference is that instead of counting repetitions, this version checks whether you're already at one of the target places, and if so, moves to the target earlier in the buffer.) I mean maybe it would be good it (defun-command-sequence my-home "Move to margin, to bol, or to bob depending on number of repetitions." back-to-indentation beginning-of-line beginning-of-buffer) (define-key global-map [home] #'my-home) does the desired thing. Steve _______________________________________________ XEmacs-Beta mailing list XEmacs-Beta(a)xemacs.org http://lists.xemacs.org/mailman/listinfo/xemacs-beta