librelist archives

Re: [shoes] Keypress question

From:

Cecil Coupe

Date:

2010-11-01 @ 05:04

Obviously the key chords are fine for edit box/line. Don't Change them
(even if you can, don't). Those are text characters. The OS and GUI
toolkits are doing the hard work for us.

I think of Keypressed (or key released) as primarily events (arrow_down,
shift arrow_right, alt shift left_arrow) that have to be interpreted by
the given Shoes code block wants them to be. In one game, arrow-left
might be something different that in another game or app. 

If for some reason a Shoes app wants to reinvent the mulitple key->char
state machine I think adding adding a new Shoes event would be the
better way. Like 'keychar do {|c| puts c} or if if only applies to a
canvas, then a block to be passed at canvas creations. 

On Sun, 2010-10-31 at 23:52 -0400, Steve Klabnik wrote:
> Hey guys-
> 
> 
> So in a keypress block, if someone sends in a key with a modifier, you
> don't get a string, you get :alt_3, for example.
> 
> 
> Problem is, what happens when someone wants to input, for example, £,
> which is alt+3 on my layout? How would I turn :alt_3 into £?
> 
> 
> Note, Shoes handles this correctly. If you do
> 
> 
> Shoes.app do
>   edit_box
> end
> 
> 
> You can type £ all day, and it works. This happens to me with Hackety
> because we do a bunch of stuff to manipulate the text, so it's a bit
> more
> complicated. 
http://github.com/hacketyhack/hacketyhack/blob/master/app/ui/editor/editor.rb#L262
, if anyone cares...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thoughts?
> 
> 
> -Steve

This makes it hard to do things like autoindentation, text completion, and
other stuff, though.

Or at least, apparently I'll have to totally re-write the way that I'm doing
it...

Oh well!

Yeah, Shoes is being pushed out of its comfort zone for writing an
internationalized text editor or terminal emulator. 

On Mon, 2010-11-01 at 07:35 -0400, Steve Klabnik wrote:
> This makes it hard to do things like autoindentation, text completion,
> and other stuff, though.
> 
> 
> Or at least, apparently I'll have to totally re-write the way that I'm
> doing it...
> 
> 
> Oh well!

Yep. Good times!