BlueGriffon 1.8 key mappings get confused

88 views
Skip to first unread message

Garret Wilson

unread,
Nov 19, 2015, 5:10:01 PM11/19/15
to bluegriffon
I'm writing this bug here instead of in Bugzilla because bugs there never seem to be answered (e.g. Bug 673, the related Bug 651, etc.). If anyone investigates them, they don't seem to both replying.

I'm on Windows 7 Professional 64-bit. I want to map BlueGriffon's keys for certain elements:

  1. I map the <code> button on the toolbar to Ctrl+Shift+C. This works. Yay! (Of course, I need to restart BlueGriffon; see the aforementioned Bug 673.)
  2. I map the link button on the toolbar to Ctrl+L and restart BlueGriffon.
  3. I select some text and hit Ctrl+L. Rather than bringing up the Link menu, it closes the currently opened document!
  4. Even worse, now Ctrl+Z closes the currently opened document! Yes, that's right---even though apparently Ctrl+Z is still mapped to Edit>Undo!
  5. If I go back and remove the Ctrl+L mapping, Ctrl+Z will still close the current document!!
  6. I remove the Ctrl+Z mapping from Edit>Undo, and Ctrl+Z still closes the current document. (sigh)
  7. I realize I had mapped Ctrl+F4 to the "close tab" functionality, so I remove that mapping. Finally my Ctrl+Z is mapped to Edit>Undo again.
  8. I re-map Ctrl+F4 to "close tab", and finally I can close a tab with Ctrl+F4. My Ctrl+Z is still mapped to Edit>Undo. My Ctrl+Shift+C is still mapped to <code>. But my Ctrl+L doesn't bring up links.


So apparently just mapping Ctrl+L to the link button can corrupt the entire table! It somehow remaps Ctrl+Z, even when I un-map Ctrl+Z, and I have to remove the Ctrl+F4 mapping to be able to start remapping everything else.


This is reproducible.


This is (yet another) huge issue with BlueGriffon.


I again (and again and again!) stress that I want to do whatever I can to support BlueGriffon get these bugs fixed, but there really seems to be little attention to the project and only one developer.


Daniel, if we contribute money to the project, would that give us a little higher level of support? Could you give us an idea of what it would take? Thanks.



Garret Wilson

unread,
Jan 7, 2016, 4:12:14 PM1/7/16
to bluegriffon
Since this post was ignored, I have filed Issue 4 on GitHub.
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages