* Re: Generic dispatcher
2013-06-30 22:46 Generic dispatcher Stefan Monnier
@ 2013-06-30 23:11 ` Xue Fuqiao
2013-06-30 23:42 ` Drew Adams
` (2 subsequent siblings)
3 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Xue Fuqiao @ 2013-06-30 23:11 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Stefan Monnier; +Cc: emacs-devel
On Mon, Jul 1, 2013 at 6:46 AM, Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> wrote:
>
> For epa/eww/mhe/... I think we should introduce a generic dispatcher.
> The way I see it, it would look like:
>
> - M-x mail RET runs one of the mail backends. First time around it
> prompts the user to choose a MUA, then stores the result in a Custom
> var and doesn't prompt any more. This would rely on
> a mail-alternatives variable holding various MUAs such as Gnus, MH-E,
> ... and third party packages can easily register themselves in this
> list via their autoloads. The user can reconsider his choice with C-u
> M-x mail RET in which case she gets prompted again.
>
> - same for M-x irc RET
> - same for M-x encrypt RET
> - same for M-x browse RET
> - we could push this further (e.g. auctex vs tex-mode.el) but I'm not
> sure it'd be such a great idea.
+1
It can reduce the heavy burdens to remember piles of package/command
names.
--
Best regards, Xue Fuqiao.
http://www.gnu.org/software/emacs/
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread* RE: Generic dispatcher
2013-06-30 22:46 Generic dispatcher Stefan Monnier
2013-06-30 23:11 ` Xue Fuqiao
@ 2013-06-30 23:42 ` Drew Adams
2013-07-01 7:43 ` Teemu Likonen
2013-07-01 13:01 ` Ted Zlatanov
3 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Drew Adams @ 2013-06-30 23:42 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Stefan Monnier, emacs-devel
> For epa/eww/mhe/... I think we should introduce a generic dispatcher.
> The way I see it, it would look like:
>
> - M-x mail RET runs one of the mail backends. First time around it
> prompts the user to choose a MUA, then stores the result in a Custom
> var and doesn't prompt any more. This would rely on
> a mail-alternatives variable holding various MUAs such as Gnus, MH-E,
> ... and third party packages can easily register themselves in this
> list via their autoloads. The user can reconsider his choice with C-u
> M-x mail RET in which case she gets prompted again.
>
> - same for M-x irc RET
> - same for M-x encrypt RET
> - same for M-x browse RET
> - we could push this further (e.g. auctex vs tex-mode.el) but I'm not
> sure it'd be such a great idea.
+1
1. Assuming all of the commands under the same dispatcher do very
similar things. And assuming a user really wants to use multiple such,
rather than just have a preferred single such (e.g., via customize).
2. As "browsing" can apply (whether this comes to mind or not) to other
things besides the web (e.g. repositories, hierarchies, and graphs of
all sorts), consider naming your `browse' dispatcher more specifically:
`browse-web' or some such.
The alternative would be to have all such diverse kinds of
browsing/navigating on the same dispatch command, but I think that
would defeat the purpose.
More generally, I'd suggest keeping this sort of thing for tight
groups of closely related commands, not for wide categories of commands.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: Generic dispatcher
2013-06-30 22:46 Generic dispatcher Stefan Monnier
2013-06-30 23:11 ` Xue Fuqiao
2013-06-30 23:42 ` Drew Adams
@ 2013-07-01 7:43 ` Teemu Likonen
2013-07-01 13:01 ` Ted Zlatanov
3 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Teemu Likonen @ 2013-07-01 7:43 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Stefan Monnier; +Cc: emacs-devel
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 451 bytes --]
Stefan Monnier [2013-06-30 18:46:36 -04:00] wrote:
> - same for M-x irc RET
> - same for M-x encrypt RET
> - same for M-x browse RET
Perhaps some generic name for on-the-fly spelling checkers too? There
are at least flyspell-, wcheck- and speck-mode whick provide a similar
feature. Flyspell is the only one in the official distribution but I
think a generic dispatcher would be a nice feature for us outsiders too.
(I'm the author of wcheck-mode.)
[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 835 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: Generic dispatcher
2013-06-30 22:46 Generic dispatcher Stefan Monnier
` (2 preceding siblings ...)
2013-07-01 7:43 ` Teemu Likonen
@ 2013-07-01 13:01 ` Ted Zlatanov
2013-07-01 23:23 ` Stefan Monnier
3 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Ted Zlatanov @ 2013-07-01 13:01 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: emacs-devel
On Sun, 30 Jun 2013 18:46:36 -0400 Stefan Monnier <monnier@IRO.UMontreal.CA> wrote:
SM> For epa/eww/mhe/... I think we should introduce a generic dispatcher.
SM> The way I see it, it would look like:
SM> - M-x mail RET runs one of the mail backends. First time around it
SM> prompts the user to choose a MUA, then stores the result in a Custom
SM> var and doesn't prompt any more. This would rely on
SM> a mail-alternatives variable holding various MUAs such as Gnus, MH-E,
SM> ... and third party packages can easily register themselves in this
SM> list via their autoloads. The user can reconsider his choice with C-u
SM> M-x mail RET in which case she gets prompted again.
SM> - same for M-x irc RET
SM> - same for M-x encrypt RET
SM> - same for M-x browse RET
SM> - we could push this further (e.g. auctex vs tex-mode.el) but I'm not
SM> sure it'd be such a great idea.
I think that's a good idea. But (as I mentioned in the "Rename `eww' to
`web'" discussion) I think focusing on command names is the wrong
approach for usability. These should be first-class commands in every
way, accessible from a top-level menu and from a convenient key
sequence. Maybe new modeline icons that respond to clicks. I just feel
that putting them under `M-x whatever' will not help usability.
Ted
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread* Re: Generic dispatcher
2013-07-01 13:01 ` Ted Zlatanov
@ 2013-07-01 23:23 ` Stefan Monnier
0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Stefan Monnier @ 2013-07-01 23:23 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: emacs-devel
> I think that's a good idea. But (as I mentioned in the "Rename `eww' to
> `web'" discussion) I think focusing on command names is the wrong
> approach for usability. These should be first-class commands in every
> way, accessible from a top-level menu
Of course, they'd have a place in the menu, as well. We already have
menu entries for them, to a large extent.
> and from a convenient key sequence.
Here, I'm much less convinced it's generally useful. Maybe for some of
them, but definitely not for all of them.
Stefan
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread