New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
building inconsistent mouse-event% #252
Comments
* Filled rectangles * Better event filter for the event listener, with checkboxes. (Also less general, but probably a good trade-off.) * due to inconsistent behaviour, mouse event-dicts got rid of buttons-down, buttons-up and rely more directly on get-left-down?, etc. The issue is that it is now possible to handcraft impossible mouse events. Filed here: racket/gui#252
There's actually an inconsistency with key-events here: When pressing shift alone, However it's the converse for mouse events: when pressing left, Context: I'm trying to understand why a number of keybindings don't work in DrRacket (for example I could never make it to accept Ctrl-Shift-T, despite showing as "c:s:t" in the active keybindings). I'm guessing the issue is rather deeply buried in the inner workings of the GUI and keymaps. |
cc @rfindler I guess |
For the original question, I agree that the backward-compatibility issue here looks tricky. I don't know how existing code would be affected. For the |
Hm, I see, that's rather annoying.
In principle I suppose it could, if keybindings in DrRacket are designed with Mac behaviour in mind, but used on X. But you're still probably right, since some other Ctl-Shift-/ keybinding does work for some reason. I wonder if DrRacket/keymaps are not trying to be too smart for their own good. I'm not sure where to go from here, and I'm pondering whether to close this issue as "won't fix". It feels like these inconsistencies across platforms should be smoothed out though, but if that doesn't solve the DrRacket keybinding problem maybe it's not even worth it. |
It is possible to build an inconsistent mouse event:
As this has caused me a bit of a headache, I'm willing to fix this, but before doing so I'm checking with you if there may be any downside with such a fix, like backward compatibility---although it may be considered this a bug I guess.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: