On Thu, Sep 3, 2026, at 09:02, Carl Distefano wrote: >> 'Physical-key match. The follow-up key is matched by scancode, so >> C-x C-s and C-x s are the same. ...' > The limitation was due to my unfamiliarity with Emacs. Fixed: > > https://ammaze.net/xyscript/emacs-kbd.zip Thanks Carl! I'll play around some more on the weekend while hoping Hurricane Lowell misses us :) > What an alien world Emacs is, where `Ctrl+x Ctrl+s` is different from > `Ctrl+xs`! I know that many hard-core programmers swear by it -- me, > I've always sworn at it. But I digress.. I've been using Emacs for around 40 years since very very early days so I guess I'm kinda used to it :) But the thing is (about keybindings) there are so very many additional packages that it's hard to find a keybinding that's free. So every conceivable possibility comes into play. A few of the more bizarre ones in my everyday repertoire are C-c C-x C-a as well as C-c t which differs from C-c C-t. I also use multi levels such as C-c s n and even C-c w f s. It takes some time but it gets in your muscle memory and becomes second nature. Now, the editor I myself could never get my fingers around is vi. And actually if, as I think and hope will take place, Xyscript catches on and people start creating more and more packages, the same thing could happen ... something to look forward to? It will be a nice problem to have. One more prediction: with an Emacs keybinding getting to production level, someone some day will write a vi emulation mode, and maybe someone else will write a WordStar mode. Just watch it happen! Bob Newell Honolulu