> > The problem is that we do not have a fixed amount of lfun. If you list > > by bindings, how would you list lfuns without shortcut? The current > > approach, IMHO, is more appropriate. > > Yes, what I prefer is 'one lfun' == 'one line'.
You need to display, to the right of lfun, One lfun | system_shortcut, removed_shortcut, user_shortcut. > In some sense, showing the binding makes people believe it is here... Is there a cross-out font? Bo
