[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Documentation for "Clone Buffers" (corrected version)
From: |
Miles Bader |
Subject: |
Re: Documentation for "Clone Buffers" (corrected version) |
Date: |
Mon, 15 Mar 2004 12:06:20 -0500 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.3.28i |
On Mon, Mar 15, 2004 at 08:27:31AM -0500, Stefan Monnier wrote:
> It should be some other fork-specific prefix instead so the command can
> still use C-u for its own purpose.
I'm skeptical.
I like C-u because it's really easy to remember, which is important if it's
not used regularly -- and AFAICS, forking fits that pattern: something that
isn't used all _that_ often, but which is very nice when you do need it, and
which cleanly fits into the C-u `slightly modified alternate behavior' mold.
-Miles
--
"Though they may have different meanings, the cries of 'Yeeeee-haw!' and
'Allahu akbar!' are, in spirit, not actually all that different."
- Re: Documentation for "Clone Buffers" (corrected version), (continued)
- Re: Documentation for "Clone Buffers" (corrected version), Eli Zaretskii, 2004/03/16
- Re: Documentation for "Clone Buffers" (corrected version), Luc Teirlinck, 2004/03/15
- Re: Documentation for "Clone Buffers" (corrected version), Richard Stallman, 2004/03/16
- Re: Documentation for "Clone Buffers" (corrected version), Karl Berry, 2004/03/14
- Re: Documentation for "Clone Buffers" (corrected version), Eli Zaretskii, 2004/03/14
- Re: Documentation for "Clone Buffers" (corrected version), Richard Stallman, 2004/03/15
Re: Documentation for "Clone Buffers" (corrected version), Miles Bader, 2004/03/12
Re: Documentation for "Clone Buffers" (corrected version), Luc Teirlinck, 2004/03/12
Re: Documentation for "Clone Buffers" (corrected version), Alex Schroeder, 2004/03/11
Re: Documentation for "Clone Buffers" (corrected version), Miles Bader, 2004/03/11
Re: Documentation for "Clone Buffers" (corrected version), Richard Stallman, 2004/03/11