Kurt Granroth wrote:
> 
> Sirtaj Singh Kang wrote:
> > On Tue, Nov 30, 1999 at 08:05:29AM -0700, Kurt Granroth wrote:
> > > I'm investigating the possibility of hacking some code to let KAccel
> > > and KAction "know" about each other.. but I would have to convert
> > > KAccel to a QObject (and add a signal) and add quite a few new
> >
> > This seems like the wrong approach to me. A KAccel should simply be a special
> > case of an action, ie is not connected to any visual interface elements.
> > Are there any differences that I've missed?
> 
> Well.. the rationale for doing it this way is so that we don't have to
> write another key config dialog for KAction AND so that we can share
> the key config files between kaccel and kaction.

I think we could share the files and dialog anyway as long as we make
them reasonably abstracted. I think Taj's approach is much cleaner.

On a similar subject, has anyone got any ideas about how to start adding
support for prefix keys to QAccel/QAction etc? One thing I do like about
MS Word is that I can rebind the keys to make them work like emacs - it
would be nice if we could do this to KWord too.

Rich.

> 
> However, it's hacky and ugly.  If you can think of a better way, then
> we should definitely go with that...
> --
> Kurt Granroth            | http://www.pobox.com/~kurt_granroth
> KDE Developer/Evangelist | SuSE Labs Open Source Developer
> granroth@kde.org         | granroth@suse.com
>            KDE -- Putting a Friendly Face on Unix

-- 
     Richard Moore		rich@ipso-facto.freeserve.co.uk
http://www.robocast.com/	richard@robocast.com
http://developer.kde.org/	rich@kde.org