Re: When do you prefer frames instead of windows?

[Rainer M Krug <Rainer@krugs.de>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1760 bytes --]

Drew Adams <drew.adams@oracle.com> writes:

>> Modern X Windows environments have keybindings for common operations
>> on frames.  However, Microsoft Windows only has a few of those, to
>> tiresome switching between the keyboard and mouse is needed.  I use
>> both X and MS Windows daily.  I generally prefer using Emacs windows
>> rather than frames becuase they can be manipulated using the keyboard
>> on all platforms.
>
> It should be possible, out of the box, to do that in Emacs itself.
> One set of keys for all platforms, and any set of keys you yourself
> choose.
>
> I wrote:
>
>  > With Emacs this is even better, as you can manipulate frames
>  > using the keyboard, not just the mouse.
>  >
>  > However, out of the box, support for using Emacs frames is pretty
>  > primitive.  So I jump through a bunch of configuration hooks to
>  > be able to use them easily (including keyboard manipulation).
>
> You need to be able to do the same kinds of things with frames
> that you can do with Emacs windows - *from the keyboard* (and with
> a mouse). Including move around incrementally, resize incrementally,
> cycle/choose, tile/split, and so on.
>
> I use Emacs that way, but as I say, this is not provided out of the
> box with `emacs -Q'.  (It should be, IMO.)

You are throwing teaser around - is your emacs config some=where on=ine,
so that I could take a look at your configuration regarding frames?

>
> I really would be interested in people's answers to my question, BTW:
>
>  > IF you could use Emacs frames as easily as you can use Emacs
>  > windows, in what scenarios would you prefer using Emacs windows,
>  > and why?
>
>

-- 
Rainer M. Krug
email: Rainer<at>krugs<dot>de
PGP: 0x0F52F982

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 494 bytes --]