Do you follow the reasoning for why they set it up this way? The comments in this function from _xorg in keyboard make it seem like it expects K1 K2 K3 K4.
#: Finds a keycode and index by looking at already used keycodes
def reuse():
for _, (keycode, _, _) in self._borrows.items():
keycodes = mapping[kc2i(keycode)]
# Only the first four items are addressable by X
for index in range(4):
if not keycodes[index]:
return keycode, index
I assume that second comment is the reason the person who wrote your function likes the number 4.
Which way is right/wrong here? It would seem at least part of the issue to me is that they don’t make the list be K1 K2 K1 K2 as they say, since the function I quoted above often receives a list formatted like K1 K2 K1 NoSymbol.
Also, if I modify the function you quoted from to remove the duplications, I’m still finding that the first element is always duplicated to the third element anyways - it must be happening elsewhere as well. Actually, even if I modify the entire function to just be something nonsensical and predictable like this:
def keysym_normalize(keysym):
# Remove trailing NoSymbol
stripped = list(reversed(list(
itertools.dropwhile(
lambda n: n == Xlib.XK.NoSymbol,
reversed(keysym)))))
if not stripped:
return
else:
return (keysym_group(stripped[0], stripped[0]), keysym_group(stripped[0], stripped[0]))
then the behavior of the output doesn’t change at all from how it behaves when this function is how it normally is… It still messes up every third special character, duplicating the previously encountered special character
Later edit: After further investigation, the duplication of the first entry to the third entry seems to happen in the Xlib library, installed with pynput, in the display.py file, in the change_keyboard_mapping function, which only has a single line. Inspecting the output of the get_keyboard_mapping() function both before and after the change_keyboard_mapping function does its thing shows that it jumps right from [0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0] to [keysym, 0, keysym, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0]. It’s still unclear to me if this is truly intended or a bug.
disregard this comment