From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: [PATCH] (woman-always-choose-first-hit): New defcustom. Date: Sun, 15 Mar 2009 00:19:16 +0200 Message-ID: References: <001636458d880a725704651acee6@google.com> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1237069176 1141 80.91.229.12 (14 Mar 2009 22:19:36 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 14 Mar 2009 22:19:36 +0000 (UTC) Cc: erich@cozi.com, rms@gnu.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org, monnier@iro.umontreal.ca, drew.adams@oracle.com, eric.hanchrow@gmail.com To: xahlee@gmail.com Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Mar 14 23:20:52 2009 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 4.50) id 1LicDr-0000mV-QU for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 14 Mar 2009 23:20:52 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:39859 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1LicCV-0007Li-Cg for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 14 Mar 2009 18:19:27 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1LicCQ-0007Ld-BW for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 14 Mar 2009 18:19:22 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1LicCO-0007LR-Na for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 14 Mar 2009 18:19:21 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=33978 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1LicCO-0007LO-J8 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 14 Mar 2009 18:19:20 -0400 Original-Received: from mtaout5.012.net.il ([84.95.2.13]:45454) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1LicCM-0001QG-Ei; Sat, 14 Mar 2009 18:19:18 -0400 Original-Received: from conversion-daemon.i_mtaout5.012.net.il by i_mtaout5.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2004.12) id <0KGI00400OFWNA00@i_mtaout5.012.net.il>; Sun, 15 Mar 2009 00:19:27 +0200 (IST) Original-Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 ([77.127.228.91]) by i_mtaout5.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2004.12) with ESMTPA id <0KGI00M8XOODAUL1@i_mtaout5.012.net.il>; Sun, 15 Mar 2009 00:19:27 +0200 (IST) In-reply-to: <001636458d880a725704651acee6@google.com> X-012-Sender: halo1@inter.net.il X-detected-operating-system: by monty-python.gnu.org: Solaris 9.1 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:109625 Archived-At: > Date: Sat, 14 Mar 2009 21:21:47 +0000 > From: xahlee@gmail.com >=20 > Eli Zaretskii wrote: > > =E2=80=A2 The problems you mention are a far cry from making WoMa= n ``unusable''. >=20 > =E2=80=9Cunusable=E2=80=9D is probably a exaggeration. I'm trying t= o express how it is =20 > unusable to most users who are not emacs enthusiasts. IMO, it is no less usable than `man', to newbies and veterans alike. > consider emacs as a tool, and likewise man and woman are tools. Peo= ple want =20 > to run man/woman mostly to get the job done, namely, reading unix m= an page =20 > in emacs. =E2=80=9Cman=E2=80=9D works. However, woman is a improvem= ent, but isn't default. =20 `woman' is not meant to be an improvement. From the commentary at th= e beginning of woman.el: ;; WoMan implements a subset of the formatting performed by the E= macs ;; `man' (or `manual-entry') command to format a UN*X manual `pag= e' ;; for display, but without calling any external programs. IOW, it's a clone of `man' that does not require `man' the external command. That's all there is to it. On some platforms, that's a hec= k of an advantage; on others, it isn't. > The extra option of minor improvement to user adds a slight complex= ity. But =20 > adding the fact that woman itself provides some rough edges. So for= some =20 > emacs user who are beginning to be adventurous, when they read abou= t woman =20 > and try it, its problem is frustrating, another tiny time drain in = emacs. `woman' works, period. So does `man', of course. Each one has its quirks and bugs (I fixed one in each just the other day), but they ar= e minor bugs. I use both, on 3 radically different platforms, and I don't find any of them ``frustrating'', nor do they need my Emacs expertise to show me a manual page in a reasonably legible way. > I think most, or all of these can be fixed, without sacrificing ANY= of =20 > emacs's power. Agreed.