Re: [Sheflug] vi, emacs, sharp sticks

["Stephen J. Turnbull" <nospam [at] sk.tsukuba.ac.jp>]

>>>>> "Will" == Will Newton <will [at] misconception.org.uk> writes:

    Will> No it isn't, it's the opposite. yy copies, dd cuts, p

OK.

    Will> pastes. I can deal with that better than C-w cuts C-y pastes
    Will> and their doesn't appear to be a key for plain old copy (I
    Will> know, cut-then-paste, but that's two keys).

M-w.

    Will> Also emacs interface needs a LOT of work IMO. It has a lot
    Will> of power but the interface barely exposes a fraction.

Well, actually it exposes too much; most anything you can imagine
doing is only 2 or 3 keystrokes away.

The problem is that at this point there must be a couple million Emacs
users, all of the available one-chord and two-chord sequences are
bound, and only about 5% of those are common to all users.  But every
user fanatically adheres to the other 5% that they use, and is
unwilling to give up the convenience of the bindings they know.

    Will> Strangely they happen to be close to the amiga key bindings
    Will> which were (AFAICR) A-C for copy, A-V for paste and A-X for
    Will> cut. Don't know why.

It's the CUA thing, Common User Access.  Motif, IBM, MSFT all sort of
agreed on certain bindings.

The reason XCV were chosen is presumably easy chording with modifier
keys.


-- 
University of Tsukuba                Tennodai 1-1-1 Tsukuba 305-8573 JAPAN
Institute of Policy and Planning Sciences       Tel/fax: +81 (298) 53-5091
_________________  _________________  _________________  _________________
What are those straight lines for?  "XEmacs rules."
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Sheffield Linux User's Group - http://www.sheflug.co.uk
To unsubscribe from this list send mail to
- <sheflug-request [at] vuw.ac.nz> - with the word 
 "unsubscribe" in the body of the message. 

  GNU the choice of a complete generation.