From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: MBR Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.help Subject: Re: When do you prefer windows instead of frames? Was: When do you prefer frames instead of windows? Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2014 13:40:27 -0500 Message-ID: <5474CD1B.1070605@arlsoft.com> References: <87k32jhe6x.fsf_-_@vsl28t2g.ww011> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1416940871 17441 80.91.229.3 (25 Nov 2014 18:41:11 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2014 18:41:11 +0000 (UTC) To: Drew Adams , dieter@duenenhof-wilhelm.de, help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Original-X-From: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Nov 25 19:41:03 2014 Return-path: Envelope-to: geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1XtL2s-0007Rf-7d for geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Tue, 25 Nov 2014 19:41:02 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:58958 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XtL2p-0005cc-ND for geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Tue, 25 Nov 2014 13:40:59 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:44358) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XtL2V-0005cW-Ju for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 25 Nov 2014 13:40:47 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XtL2N-0006Q0-TP for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 25 Nov 2014 13:40:39 -0500 Original-Received: from mail-hampton.hostforweb.net ([205.234.186.191]:46090 helo=hampton.hostforweb.net) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XtL2N-0006Pk-Fk for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 25 Nov 2014 13:40:31 -0500 Original-Received: from c-24-34-107-193.hsd1.ma.comcast.net ([24.34.107.193]:57831 helo=[192.168.1.121]) by hampton.hostforweb.net with esmtpsa (TLSv1:DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA:128) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1XtL2J-0044qX-Mb; Tue, 25 Nov 2014 12:40:29 -0600 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.8; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.4.0 In-Reply-To: X-OutGoing-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.9 X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - hampton.hostforweb.net X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - gnu.org X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12] X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - arlsoft.com X-Get-Message-Sender-Via: hampton.hostforweb.net: authenticated_id: mbr+arlsoft.com/only user confirmed/virtual account not confirmed X-Source: X-Source-Args: X-Source-Dir: X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x (barebone) [generic] X-Received-From: 205.234.186.191 X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.14 X-BeenThere: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: Users list for the GNU Emacs text editor List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.help:101185 Archived-At: Be very careful with the phrase "use ... as easily as you can use ...". There are some people out there who consider pointing with the mouse easy. I, on the other hand find it easier to use the keyboard. The keyboard, along with Emacs' wide array of cursor positioning commands, gives me the ability to quickly and easily get to specific precise positions - at least precise based on character position in a character cell terminal or editor window. There are probably other areas where different Emacs users would have diametrically opposite views on what they consider to be easy. Mark Rosenthal On 11/25/14 10:46 AM, Drew Adams wrote: >>> I would ask an opposite question: 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? >> For supporting tasks only: Imagine you are starting from a full-screen >> window and want to see temporarily a variable definition in a second >> window while still hacking away. The advantage is that window >> operations, like C-x } enlarge-window-horizontally, >> delete-other-windows-vertically,... operate simultaneously on all >> windows. In such situations it seems to me much more convenient to >> use windows than set it up with frames. > Again - but what "IF you could use Emacs frames as easily as you > can use Emacs windows"? That's the question. > > Pop up a *Help* frame instead of a *Help* window to show help. Hit > `C-x 0' to get rid of that frame when you're done. You probably do > not need to resize the frame (e.g., if the frame is automatically > fit to the size of just the *Help* text). But if you do, then use > keys to resize it, just as you would for a window. Yes, but typing C-x o is something I can do easily because it involves two fingers on the left hand immediately followed by one finger on the right hand, without fingers my ever having to leave home position. C-x 5 o, on the other hand involves my typing two successive characters with my left hand before I can switch to the right hand for the "o". And, worse than that, "x" is in the bottom row but "5" is in the top row, which means that even though my fingers' average position is over home position, they're jumping Saturday as far as they ever do on vertically. All this means that my mental focus on the code I'm writing doesn't get distracted when I type C-x 0, but when I type C-x 5 o, I have to take some of my focus away from the code to make sure I don't miss the "5" after the "x". > > IOW, think past what you can do with a window (resize, move, control > where it pops up, etc.) that you think you cannot easily do with a > frame now. > > I certainly agree that if frames are not made as convenient to > interact with (i.e., the same kinds of operations you use on > windows) then Emacs windows remain useful. But if Emacs *did* > support such operations with frames, out of the box,... > >