Feature Request: allow binding 𝗸𝗲𝘆 𝘀𝗲𝗾𝘂𝗲𝗻𝗰𝗲𝘀, not just the binding of a single key, e.g `pj` to open a pane below

[wis]

here's my use case:

I want to be able to:

• use modes and key sequences for everything you can do in Zellij (Vim style)
• define keys sequences, ideally with built-in syntax, e.g. p with hjkl using e.g. bind "ph" {} / bind "pj" {} / bind "pk" {} / bind "pl" {} to e.g. open a pane in that direction
  • in a similar fashion to how you can do d‎w to delete a word in Vim
  • currently, in a hacky way, you can already define key sequences using modes, e.g. pane actions/sequences that start with p use the built-in pane mode that is entered with p by default. but this is not optimal for ease of use or readability, and we only have a couple of built-in modes.
  • the ability to have more modes, custom modes, can enable you to define more key sequences for other actions you can do in Zellij.
• use the Lock mode of zellij as the "Insert" mode and only that mode to type text or use any shortcut for the program running inside Zellij and not worry about conflicts with Zellij's shortcuts.
  • this is similar to how Vimium, the browser extension, has an "Insert" mode that allows all input to pass through to the web page (except Esc).

here's my basic config.kdl:

// to override the default keybindings completely, set property "clear-defaults=true"
keybinds clear-defaults=true {
    shared {
        //bind "Esc" { SwitchToMode "Normal"; } //can't use it because vim uses it
        bind "Alt z" { SwitchToMode "Normal"; }
    }
    normal {
        // disable all keys
        bind "`" "1"    "2"    "3"    "4"    "5"    "6"    "7"    "8"    "9"    "0"    "-"  "="    "\\"  "Backspace" \
             "~" "!"    "@"    "#"    "$"    "%"    "^"    "&"    "*"    "("    ")"    "_"  "+"    "|" \
        "Tab" ";"    "q"    "w"    "f"    "p"    "b"    "'"    "l"    "u"    "y"    "j"    "]" \
        "Tab" ":"    "Q"    "W"    "F"    "P"    "B"    "\""    "L"    "U"    "Y"    "J"    "}" \
        "/"    "a"    "r"    "s"    "t"    "g"    "k"    "n"    "e"    "i"    "o"    "Enter" \
        "?"    "A"    "R"    "S"    "T"    "G"    "K"    "N"    "E"    "I"    "O" "Enter" \
        "z"    "x"    "c"    "v"    "d"    "["    "h"    "m"    ","    "." \
        "Z"    "X"    "C"    "V"    "D"    "{"    "H"    "M"    "<"    ">"  {}
        bind "Space" "Esc" {}
        bind "h" { MoveFocus "Left"; }
        bind "j" { MoveFocus "Down"; }
        bind "k" { MoveFocus "Up"; }
        bind "l" { MoveFocus "Right"; }
        bind "p" { SwitchToMode "Pane"; } // enter pane mode
    }
    locked {
    }
    pane {
        bind /*ph*/ "h" { NewPane "Left"; SwitchToMode "Normal"; MovePane "Left"; } 
        bind /*pj*/ "j" { NewPane "Down"; SwitchToMode "Normal"; } 
        bind /*pk*/ "k" { NewPane "Up"; SwitchToMode "Normal"; MovePane "Up"; } 
        bind /*pl*/ "l" { NewPane "Right"; SwitchToMode "Normal"; } 
        bind /*px*/ "x" { CloseFocus; SwitchToMode "Normal"; } 
        bind /*pc*/ "c" { MovePaneBackwards; }
        bind /*pf*/ "f" { ToggleFocusFullscreen; SwitchToMode "Normal"; }
    }
    shared_except "locked" {
        bind "i" { SwitchToMode "Locked"; } // enter insert mode
        bind "Ctrl q" { Quit; }
    }
}

[Antiarchitect]

Any progress on this? I saw https://github.com/zellij-org/zellij/issues/3201 and https://github.com/zellij-org/zellij/issues/248 Cool idea about virtual modes. Cool idea about Leader key + sequences (Spacemacs, Astronvim approach). Let me explain my case: Currently using tmux with backtick as the leader key. So backtick-c sequence creates new tab, backtick-x deletes tab, backtick-[ switches to copy mode, backtick-Esc cancels the operation started. All these are not combinations but sequences and all of them operates with different input modes in your terminology (as it seems to me). So I want the sequence to do the proper job (e.g. create tab) or be canceled by Esc and return back to the mode I called the sequence from. Sequences are widely used in Vim, Emacs, Spacemacs.

[samholmes]

Instead of binding key sequences, we could achieve the same result with "custom modes". First we bind p to enter a custom mode called "ModeP", then in that mode we can define "k" and "h" to their respective commands.

Additionally, we can apply a "backspace" keybinding to all modes to issue the hypothetical command "ReturnToLastMode" which will exit to the previous mode. Such a command implies that modes are maintained in a stack... So instead of having an unbounded stack-based mode system, we could opt to have "nested modes" where a mode can be nested in another mode and then we can have a command "GoToOuterMode" which will exit the current nested mode for the outer mode. Such a nested mode system could be complimented with some syntax to enter a nested mode deeply instead of always requiring nested modes be drilled down by commands. This flexibility could lead to a full state-machine with some contextual awareness via nesting.