On Wed, Aug 3, 2016 at 4:36 PM, Esteban Lorenzano <estebanlm@gmail.com> wrote:
I will just re-post my first answer:
if reintroduce them means reintroduce them hardcoded as before, then Iâm complete against it and I WILL NOT integrate such solution. Iâm sorry for being so strong here, but previous implementation was lame and we need to get rid of them.
Now, I understand people are used to use those bindings and also some others (no idea which ones because I never used them⦠for me ocompletion is good enough⦠but those are tastes). So I would be very happy to integrate a generic way to define keybindings and outputs (which is already there, with keymapping, but I mean an editor or something), and I would be very happy to integrate a default configuration (which of course, will include #ifTrue:/##ifFalse:)
I would guess code expansions could be many and varied between different individuals, and quickly consume available keyboard shortcuts. Perhaps a generic mechanism would be single shortcut for "code expansion" which processes the letters preceding the cursor. For example, using shortcut <ctrl-e> for code expansion and typing... itf<ctrl-e> ==> ifTrue: [ ] ifFalse: [ ] The could be an interface to define these code expansions - initially at least on a purely personal basis.
And this is not really for adding a new feature. This shortcut already (always :) ) existed
With a single shortcut for code expansion, perhaps a few other existing combinations could be freed up. cheers -ben
Esteban
On 03 Aug 2016, at 10:30, Denis Kudriashov <dionisiydk@gmail.com> wrote:
2016-08-03 10:27 GMT+02:00 Guille Polito <guillermopolito@gmail.com>:
I'm also against.
- They take a place in the shortcuts that prevents others to use it - If lazy people really needs this, the code completion should be enhanced. This is a code completion concern...
+1