[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: Menu commands to M-x history?
From: |
Drew Adams |
Subject: |
RE: Menu commands to M-x history? |
Date: |
Mon, 27 Jul 2009 11:57:08 -0700 |
> > As someone else said, `M-x' is, well, for `M-x'-executed commands.
>
> Yes, Richard said that but I do not agree. The M-x history is
> for the users.
And? Of course histories are for users.
"The history"? There are plenty of different histories, appropriate to different
commands that use them. This is the history for `M-x'. When you call
`completing-read', if you specify a history-variable arg, then the user's input
is added to that particular history. The history used for `M-x' is
`extended-command-history'.
> Don't mix the programmer semantics with the user semantics unless
> there is a good reason to do so. Very often there is, but not in a
> case like this.
What does that mean? How did I mix them? Or what non-mixing do you have in mind?
IOW, what is it that you are really trying to say?
> > That's important for users.
>
> Why is it important for users?
See what was said previously. Noise reduction. Pertinence of history entries to
the task at hand.
You know, we _could_ always use just `minibuffer-history', and have no such
specificity. But that is less useful to users.
> > It is why commands executed using key bindings are also not
> > included in the history list.
>
> That is a totally diffirent story since it is a different context as I
> said before. You really do not need any of the commands you execute
> with a key binding in the M-x history.
I think you do. But only on demand. I won't bother arguing for/about that here.
But yes, in Icicles, on-demand access to menu-item commands is no different from
on-demand access to all other commands called using `call-interactively'. I
simply advise `call-interactively', to push each such command to the larger
list, `icicle-interactive-history'.
> > So, I hear you say, filter out insignificant commands -
> commands such as
> > `self-insert-command' and `forward-char'.
>
> That is hallucination ;-)
You in fact say to filter out _all_ commands invoked via keys, which is an even
stronger hallucination.
> No one calls these commands from the menus. (You did not intend to say
> that, but I could not resist writing this ...)
I said that I treat all commands called using `call-interactively' the same way.
> >> Drew, I think you see what I mean. This reasoning just gets overlay
> >> complicated to actually use IMO.
> >
> > Why? The only change is to provide some key to let you
> > access the additional commands.
>
> Because it is intended to be helpful to newbies, Not to
> experienced Emacs users.
I intend it to be helpful to both. If a newbie can learn `C-h k', then s?he can
learn a key to complete commands previously invoked from the menu.
And as I mentioned, with La Carte, a newbie can use just the menu if s?he wants,
with completion of menu items. And there, the history passed to
`completing-read' is `icicle-interactive-history', so there is no need to hit a
special key to access such commands.
It is only for `M-x' (which is not about menu items) that you hit a special key
to enlarge the history list to include commands invoked other than by `M-x'.
> That they should not be to deep is a valid argument mainly when you
> use the commands from the menus often. But it is a bad argument when
> you want to use the menus more for finding commands. (We use that
> reasoning for example in the help menus.)
I don't have an argument with you here, except that _other things being equal_,
a shallow is easier than deep. Believe me, as someone who used the infamous
Interleaf GUI, which had cascading menus 8 zillion levels deep - that's no
panacea for users.
> In the cases that the menus are deep it can be very helpful to put the
> commands in M-x history IMO. And the other ones does not disturb very
> much since you either do not use them often or use a key binding for
> the commands.
We agree that being able to access menu items via history can be helpful. We
disagree whether such access should be by default or on demand.
> Yes. I think they should be in M-x command history. Not putting them
> there is merely a misunderstanding of what semantics to use.
Dunno what that means.
- RE: Menu commands to M-x history?, (continued)
- RE: Menu commands to M-x history?, Drew Adams, 2009/07/21
- Re: Menu commands to M-x history?, Lennart Borgman, 2009/07/21
- Re: Menu commands to M-x history?, Bill Wohler, 2009/07/22
- Re: Menu commands to M-x history?, Mathias Dahl, 2009/07/22
- RE: Menu commands to M-x history?, Drew Adams, 2009/07/26
- Re: Menu commands to M-x history?, Lennart Borgman, 2009/07/27
- RE: Menu commands to M-x history?, Drew Adams, 2009/07/27
- Re: Menu commands to M-x history?, Lennart Borgman, 2009/07/27
- RE: Menu commands to M-x history?, Drew Adams, 2009/07/27
- Re: Menu commands to M-x history?, Lennart Borgman, 2009/07/27
- RE: Menu commands to M-x history?,
Drew Adams <=
- Re: Menu commands to M-x history?, Lennart Borgman, 2009/07/27
- RE: Menu commands to M-x history?, Drew Adams, 2009/07/27
- Re: Menu commands to M-x history?, Lennart Borgman, 2009/07/27
- RE: Menu commands to M-x history?, Drew Adams, 2009/07/27
- Re: Menu commands to M-x history?, Lennart Borgman, 2009/07/27
- RE: Menu commands to M-x history?, Drew Adams, 2009/07/27
- Re: Menu commands to M-x history?, Mathias Dahl, 2009/07/27
Re: Menu commands to M-x history?, Stefan Monnier, 2009/07/21