From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Drew Adams Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: RE: Emacs Survey: Toolbars Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2020 08:34:05 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: References: <87o8iv3ac3.fsf@gnus.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="38285"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Stefan Monnier , Lars Ingebrigtsen Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Tue Dec 15 17:35:10 2020 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1kpDI6-0009mw-4F for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Tue, 15 Dec 2020 17:35:10 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:52712 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kpDI5-0004Dl-6G for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Tue, 15 Dec 2020 11:35:09 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:42420) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kpDHH-0003MP-G5 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 15 Dec 2020 11:34:20 -0500 Original-Received: from aserp2130.oracle.com ([141.146.126.79]:47746) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kpDHD-0004wY-SM for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 15 Dec 2020 11:34:18 -0500 Original-Received: from pps.filterd (aserp2130.oracle.com [127.0.0.1]) by aserp2130.oracle.com (8.16.0.42/8.16.0.42) with SMTP id 0BFGJdh1038970; Tue, 15 Dec 2020 16:34:09 GMT DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=oracle.com; h=mime-version : message-id : date : from : sender : to : cc : subject : references : in-reply-to : content-type : content-transfer-encoding; s=corp-2020-01-29; bh=KD9FuK1ULPVBCMVGZQQ3QsO1Buu9x7tV1NaS2rflZoA=; b=oF1OBsEih9UA7c9M4cFVWYT/hSsEcVelOMdXn+RQ4qXkmJl6vf/UA9cddHvk2ux23AtJ k+BMraobufu33c9piYxiCoy8l108/m2vgqTiiPjdpglnCyf1hIBtfy/HoNuZ/H4p3AAh RZMhvikFbYMlaqlhVztfuO2DqHjKUML/rdgaI14lziVz3NPmIoYAFK9QSc/3onw2GGPV skJkDnN6FVq4Xqv18+9tS2xYzFVmwWA3ypyD/r2eI866+TlY/Eb72jlJRFjWGdlivKtP FzgqYb2Gqy0IBJoQleIt+lky25uvrOiG9btzCU+LhzW6LlPjGDIZh2NuXkd0tXa5LD9s HA== Original-Received: from userp3030.oracle.com (userp3030.oracle.com [156.151.31.80]) by aserp2130.oracle.com with ESMTP id 35ckcbbpy7-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=FAIL); Tue, 15 Dec 2020 16:34:09 +0000 Original-Received: from pps.filterd (userp3030.oracle.com [127.0.0.1]) by userp3030.oracle.com (8.16.0.42/8.16.0.42) with SMTP id 0BFGK91K191760; Tue, 15 Dec 2020 16:34:08 GMT Original-Received: from aserv0122.oracle.com (aserv0122.oracle.com [141.146.126.236]) by userp3030.oracle.com with ESMTP id 35d7swfsys-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Tue, 15 Dec 2020 16:34:08 +0000 Original-Received: from abhmp0008.oracle.com (abhmp0008.oracle.com [141.146.116.14]) by aserv0122.oracle.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id 0BFGY6Vb008158; Tue, 15 Dec 2020 16:34:07 GMT In-Reply-To: X-Priority: 3 X-Mailer: Oracle Beehive Extensions for Outlook 2.0.1.9.1 (1003210) [OL 16.0.5071.0 (x86)] X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=nai engine=6000 definitions=9836 signatures=668683 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 mlxlogscore=999 spamscore=0 mlxscore=0 suspectscore=0 malwarescore=0 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2009150000 definitions=main-2012150111 X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=nai engine=6000 definitions=9836 signatures=668683 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 bulkscore=0 mlxlogscore=999 priorityscore=1501 mlxscore=0 suspectscore=0 adultscore=0 phishscore=0 malwarescore=0 impostorscore=0 lowpriorityscore=0 clxscore=1015 spamscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2009150000 definitions=main-2012150111 Received-SPF: pass client-ip=141.146.126.79; envelope-from=drew.adams@oracle.com; helo=aserp2130.oracle.com X-Spam_score_int: -43 X-Spam_score: -4.4 X-Spam_bar: ---- X-Spam_report: (-4.4 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:260878 Archived-At: > FWIw, I believe the toolbar should behave a bit more like the > header-line: it should not "default to off" but instead it should only > exist in those buffers where it is useful. >=20 > IMO a toolbar should contain things that are used often, and by "often" > I don't mean "in most sessions" but rather often enough that the time > taken to pick it from the menu-bar would be excessive. > Contrary to the menu-bar, the toolbar is not a good way to advertise > Emacs's functionality because there just isn't enough room to put that > info, so to justify its existence it should be *useful*. >=20 > For most major modes, it's hard to find a justification for a toolbar, > and for some major modes, OTOH, it's a no-brainer (e.g. mpc.el). > But I don't think we've done a good job of making use of the toolbar for > the middle ground. >=20 > IOW, the current tool-bar is a mechanism that we haven't really tried > hard to make use of it. Maybe instead of "actions" it should mostly > contain "toggle buttons" for minor modes (and maybe these would need to > be new minor modes, since most of our minor modes are designed under > the principle that they're not toggle at a high frequency)? FWIW: 1. I agree with what Stefan said. Buffer-specific if possible. Most modes don't justify it on by default. (But I don't think it matters whether we decide that tool-bar buttons should only or mainly be for toggling something.) 2. I think that the default "on" state should be that provided by `tool-bar-pop-up-mode' from my library `tool-bar+.el' (or similar). https://www.emacswiki.org/emacs/ToolBar#tool-bar-pop-up-mode tl;dr: Save space without sacrificing discoverability or availability of the tool-bar. Advantage relative to showing the tool-bar: Instead of sacrificing an entire line of tool-bars (vertical space), you sacrifice the horizontal space of an additional menu-bar menu. Not a real menu, but a menu name that's really a button that opens the tool-bar for a one-off action. Advantage relative to not showing the tool-bar: Discoverability. The tool-bar+.el code (any or all of it) could be added to Emacs. Or the design can be used as inspiration for something similar. ___ The same library also provides another minor mode for the tool-bar: `tool-bar-here-mode'. This is the same as 'tool-bar-mode', except that it affects only the current frame. This saves real estate on frames other than those where you've chosen to have a tool-bar.