[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: emacs for everything?
From: |
Joe Corneli |
Subject: |
Re: emacs for everything? |
Date: |
Wed, 17 Nov 2004 16:46:42 -0600 |
> As for why I prefer to use X, it is because there are more modifiers
> available in an emacs running under X than in an emacs running in
> the terminal.
You mean, key-modifiers like C-M-<right>, right? I've got all
those on the console, too.
Um, I mean key modifiers like H-s-C-M-A-T, and if you have all of
those on the terminal, I assume that some are just cheap
simulations.
- Re: emacs for everything?, (continued)
- Message not available
- Re: emacs for everything?, Floyd L. Davidson, 2004/11/27
- Message not available
- Re: emacs for everything?, David Hansen, 2004/11/28
- dual head video system (was Re: emacs for everything?), ken, 2004/11/30
- Message not available
- Re: dual head video system, Floyd L. Davidson, 2004/11/30
- Re: emacs for everything?, Alan Mackenzie, 2004/11/18
- Message not available
- Re: emacs for everything?, Alan Mackenzie, 2004/11/17
- Re: emacs for everything?,
Joe Corneli <=
- Message not available
- Re: emacs for everything?, Alan Mackenzie, 2004/11/18
- Re: emacs for everything?, Joe Corneli, 2004/11/18