Re: mc Digest, Vol 102, Issue 3
- From: Theodore Kilgore <kilgota banach math auburn edu>
- To: Mueen Nawaz <mailinglists nawaz org>
- Cc: mc gnome org
- Subject: Re: mc Digest, Vol 102, Issue 3
- Date: Sat, 13 Oct 2012 15:19:39 -0500 (CDT)
On Sat, 13 Oct 2012, Mueen Nawaz wrote:
chris glur <crglur gmail com> writes:
--------------
2. The ghost tabs and ghost single space characters are not
transferred........................................
anywhere else when mouse-paste is done........
You mean an exta comminication between the mouse-paster and the editor?
Such complications are to be avoided.
We already have them. You have to shift click to copy and paste with the
mouse. Should we get rid of that as well?
Actually, it seems to me that is a good question. There may be a good
reason for needing to use the shift button, but what is the reason,
exactly? Just curious. But perhaps someone knows.
OTOH, to hold down the shift key is rather easy. The question of
switching invisible characters on or off is not a mere holding of the
shift key. The procedure for such switching is sufficiently long and
involved that it would be really inconvenient to use it more than once a
day. (Thinking out loud: Hmmm. Possibly a script to do this could be
mapped to some weird key combination, maybe Cntrl-Alt-shift or something
else that's weird)
I have a good old friend who
detests syntax highlighting - he did most of his programming before they
became popular. Many people consider a spell checker bloat.
Good examples. I do regard spell checkers as bloat. None of them can
actually be trusted. For example, some spell checkers probably do not know
that both "calendar" and "calender" are words, while some other "better"
spell checkers might have been taught that both of them _are_ words. But
to have one of the "better" spell checkers which "knows" that both of
these are "correct spellings" is in itself no help at all. A calendar is
hung on the wall. A calender is used while manufacturing paper. There is
no context in which both "spellings" are correct. Oops. How many other
examples of this problem are there? Many. One might start with "its" and
"it's." Again, in any given context at most one of the two can be correct.
You have to realize that you're arbitrarily drawing a line as to what's
acceptable and what's "artsy". Anything beyond Edlin's capabilities is
artsy to some.
Indeed. That was part of my point. Another part would be that some people
might consider even the presence of a mouse to be "artsy." One does have
to be careful about such matters. Especially, leaders of big projects need
to be more careful.
For example, not all design decisions taken from on high both in KDE and
in Gnome about "how a desktop environment is supposed to work" have been
universally popular. Some of those decisions have not always meshed
well with the work flow and work habits and expectations of too many of
their users. Sometimes, the response has been that the problem lies with
those users who just can not understand what is good for them. Such an
attitude seems to have worked well enough for Microsoft, but Linux desktop
projects cater to a very different clientele.
I understand that there is an option to turn these ghost characters on,
or to turn them off.
GOOD! Show me how ?
In the editor, press F9, go to Options and then General. Then outside of
the editor go to Options and "Save Setup" - this will ensure the
behavior is saved for future Midnight Commander sessions.
Right. More detailed explanation in my reply.
Given that it can be turned off, is there still a problem here? I can
understand it would be a serious usability issue if one can't and your
grievances would have a lot more weight, but I think it's fine as it is
as long as the user can choose it. I suppose one could argue which
should be the default mode.
As I said, I would wish for a third option. Namely, that I can see the
invisible characters, but the mouse will not turn them into visible
characters if I use it to copy something. Most ideal of all, of course,
would be that it copies them while preserving their fundamental, invisible
but functional nature. Perhaps it really would be too difficult to write
the code which can do this. But, hey, I can still wish.
No. My requiremet trumps yours.
The most primitive requirement is UNIQUE.
All further fancy-facilities are merely ONE of an infinite fad posibility.
And some of those fancy-facilities is why people use Midnight
Commander.
Indeed. There are after all other file managers, especially related to the
big desktop projects for example. I don't think that I have ever seen a
one of them which works so well and I am not interested in using them even
in the X environment.
Also, I'll add that Midnight Commander lets you use a different editor
if mcedit doesn't suit your needs, which makes things much more flexible
for the user.
Also true, of course. And one can even "hard wire" this as an option in
the configuration for MC, too.
[...] (cute story, BTW. I don't teach astronomy, but I do teach
mathematics and I can see things like that from both sides of the desk)
Theodore Kilgore
- References:
- Re: mc Digest, Vol 102, Issue 3
- Re: mc Digest, Vol 102, Issue 3
- Re: mc Digest, Vol 102, Issue 3
- Re: mc Digest, Vol 102, Issue 3
- Re: mc Digest, Vol 102, Issue 3
- Re: mc Digest, Vol 102, Issue 3
[
Date Prev][
Date Next] [
Thread Prev][
Thread Next]
[
Thread Index]
[
Date Index]
[
Author Index]