On 2014-01-02 14:32, Paul Gration
Ouch... I dived into this some time ago. To be frank I only remember
my conclusion at that point was to use KEY_NUMERIC_1 etc, not the
Alec, would KEY_NUMERIC_1 be preferred to KEY_1 from the
namespace? And do you / anyone else know if there is there an
intended difference for these?
Trying to re-evaluate:
- Whatever we use, trying to stick to one of these forms would of
course be the best.
- The KEY_NUMERIC_ corresponds to the buttons on the numeric
keyboard whereas the KEY_1 etc corresponds to a the regular QWERTY
keys on a standard PC keyboard.
- One could argue that a remote is closer to a numeric keyboard than
to a standard keyboard.
- OTOH, a simple search in current remotes reveals 72 uses of KEY_1
vs just 2 of KEY_NUMERIC_1.
- The kernel built-in decoding seems to use KEY_1..KEY_9 .
I'm pretty sure this is a more complete picture than what I had last
time. A tentative conclusion would be to use KEY_1 etc in new
configs, trying to stay consistent with most existing ones and also
the kernel built-in decoding.