[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: (no subject)
Re: (no subject)
Wed, 12 Jan 2005 15:24:29 -0500
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.4) Gecko/20030624
Michael Schroeder wrote:
On Tue, Jan 11, 2005 at 12:13:29PM -0500, Raymond Page wrote:
I'm glad to see some people are interested in putting forth ideas.
I know a lot of people would benefit from having the window
drawing code redone so that horizontal/vertical splits can be
achieved in a manner akin to vim.
vertical splits is a great idea. Since my display is a 4x3 - 1400x1050
I don't even see a need for horizontal splits. I'd love to have a way
I could split the screen in four though.. so I can display four logfiles
being updated with a key combo to switch from one to the other and
another one to zoom in the current window to full screen.
Something like the old IBM 3190 plasma display:
You don't have to redo the window drawing code for this, it already
supports it. It's just the user interface stuff and the resize
handling that would need some work.
Also mouse support would be a great feature.
The first I thing I look at when evaluating a new app is whether it's
usable w/o a mouse. The only use I have for a mouse is plugging
one in to disable the touchpad on my laptop.
One reason I'm moving away from the X gui's is that they're usually
difficult or impossible to navigate w/o a mouse. Let's just hope that
adding or enhancing mouse support in gnu/screen won't result in
some functionality loss where keyboard navigation is concerned.
How do the other list members feel about this?
Skeptical.. On thing that makes gnu/screen stand out is its remarkable
ergonomy. With minimal customization you have every possible
navigation feature literally at your fingertips. With mouse-navigable
window managers you have it at arm's length instead...
Hopefully, this great piece of software can be configured without
Re: (no subject), Brian Mathis, 2005/01/11
Re: (no subject), Raymond Page, 2005/01/11
Re: (no subject), Raymond Page, 2005/01/12
- Re: (no subject), (continued)