From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: grischka Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: RE: Emacs learning curve Date: Tue, 13 Jul 2010 04:13:25 +0200 Message-ID: <4C3BCBC5.3060807@gmx.de> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1278987224 23382 80.91.229.12 (13 Jul 2010 02:13:44 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 13 Jul 2010 02:13:44 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: drew.adams@oracle.com Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Jul 13 04:13:43 2010 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OYV0A-0001yG-QV for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 13 Jul 2010 04:13:43 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:35858 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1OYV0A-0005ZE-6A for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 12 Jul 2010 22:13:42 -0400 Original-Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=46263 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1OYV02-0005YH-EB for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 12 Jul 2010 22:13:35 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OYV01-0004Iy-Gd for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 12 Jul 2010 22:13:34 -0400 Original-Received: from mail.gmx.net ([213.165.64.20]:39050) by eggs.gnu.org with smtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OYV01-0004In-59 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 12 Jul 2010 22:13:33 -0400 Original-Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 13 Jul 2010 02:13:29 -0000 Original-Received: from unknown (EHLO [10.62.16.97]) [82.113.106.188] by mail.gmx.net (mp063) with SMTP; 13 Jul 2010 04:13:29 +0200 X-Authenticated: #18588216 X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX18XrDBA/NgXeHcCUssklzC0Vei5N0PFnN2DA+4gja HElzd0h3p8LEsB User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.23 (Windows/20090812) Original-References: 62E9699C07054418AB66F9C5FCB54E5C@us.oracle.com X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0 X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:127138 Archived-At: From: Drew Adams > But with the point of view of splitting (the verb), the answer unambiguosly > agrees with Emacs terminology - you do in fact split the window horizontally. > Take an axe, hold it horizontally, and split the window. Go ahead. You get two > windows disposed vertically, one above the other. It is simply incorrect to say > that "`split-horizontally' splits vertically". Bad one, I'm afraid. Sure, the answer that you give is unambiguous, but unlike you say it does not agree with Emacs terminology. > (Disclaimer: I was not involved in the Emacs choices for scroll "up" or split > "horizontally".) Maybe not ;)