On Mon, Aug 30, 2021 at 07:39:00PM -0700, li...@ifohancroft.com wrote:
Would you mind pointing out where you got that information? As far as I know there is no need to do this, but maybe there is a problem I'm not aware of.Sorry. I meant to reply to the list.
Posting my reply to his back to the list too.
I'd be happy to.Apparently, I was wrong and it was not in the manual, but in the Mutt Guide: https://gitlab.com/muttmua/mutt/-/wikis/MuttGuide/Macros#how-to-useUnder 'Usage: macro menu key sequence [ description ]', right before the first example, in the explanation of each part, there is the sentence:"Though you can use the bound keys too, that is not recommended!"
I see. Thanks for replying and letting me know.In this case, I believe they are saying to use the <function> syntax inside the macro, rather than the keys bound to the function. For example, using "<enter-command>" rather than ":", or "<shell-escape>" rather than "!".
That way, your macros are portable and don't break if you decide to map a different key to "<enter-command>" or "<shell-escape>" in the future.
I thought there may be something about it, that may create a problem in a weird edge case, that if I encounter some day might confuse the hell out of me while trying to figure out the cause of, because I would have forgotten it by then, so I thought it's easier to just unbind the keys first.I'd be more than happy if it turns out that's not needed.
It certainly didn't cause any problems, but I think you can safely remove the unbind before your macro declarations. :-)
-Kevin -- Kevin J. McCarthy GPG Fingerprint: 8975 A9B3 3AA3 7910 385C 5308 ADEF 7684 8031 6BDA
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
