This Bugzilla instance is a read-only archive of historic NetBeans bug reports. To report a bug in NetBeans please follow the project's instructions for reporting issues.

Bug 91366 - Cannot find Ctrl-Page{Up,Down} to {Previous,Next} Tab
Summary: Cannot find Ctrl-Page{Up,Down} to {Previous,Next} Tab
Status: RESOLVED DUPLICATE of bug 109150
Alias: None
Product: platform
Classification: Unclassified
Component: Window System (show other bugs)
Version: 6.x
Hardware: All All
: P4 blocker (vote)
Assignee: David Simonek
URL:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2006-12-20 19:01 UTC by Jesse Glick
Modified: 2008-12-22 10:50 UTC (History)
1 user (show)

See Also:
Issue Type: DEFECT
Exception Reporter:


Attachments

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description Jesse Glick 2006-12-20 19:01:50 UTC
061220, JDK 7, Ocean L&F. I have gotten annoyed with the nonstandard keybindings
Alt-Left and Alt-Right for Previous and Next Tab. Firefox uses Ctrl-PageUp and
Ctrl-PageDown in addition to Ctrl-Tab, so I have gotten used to that, and anyway
using the Alt key in applications except for mnemonics is usually a bad idea. I
decided to bind these keys like in Firefox. Also Previous/Next Inner Tab can be
on Ctrl-Shift-Page*, which is a better choice of keys because
Alt-Shift-Left/Right is already bound in my Gnome window manager.

Mini-problem #2: these actions are not in the Window folder in the key binding
section of the Options dialog where you might expect them, but rather in the Go
To folder (which BTW does not match any other GUI element - should be Navigate).

Main problem: after making these bindings, Ctrl-Page* do not do anything. I
guess JScrollPane is grabbing them for the horizontal scroll actions, which I
never use. (If your source code is scrolling horizontally, your lines are too
long!) Is there some way to override the Swing bindings?

Ctrl-Shift-Page* do work as expected, e.g. for switching between the Java editor
and the form editor.
Comment 1 reinouts 2007-05-10 14:45:59 UTC
Confirming this problem...
Comment 2 Jesse Glick 2007-07-13 16:46:18 UTC
Sounds like this just got fixed under issue #108517?

*** This issue has been marked as a duplicate of 109150 ***