[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: emacs for everything?
From: |
Maciek Pasternacki |
Subject: |
Re: emacs for everything? |
Date: |
Wed, 24 Nov 2004 14:10:59 +0100 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.110003 (No Gnus v0.3) Emacs/21.3 (gnu/linux) |
On Prickle-Prickle, The Aftermath 37, 3170 YOLD, Lee Sau Dan wrote:
> Maciek> X11 binds Windows keys as Super modifier,
>
> Only for recent versions of XFree86. With previous versions, I needed
> to modify the config files to do that. And there isn't too much
> well-formed documentations for configuring the sophisticated 'xkb'
> system.
Well, `xkb' *is* poorly documented. That's why I still use .Xmodmap
to switch parenthesis to Lisp-machine-like layout (`(' is where `['
used to be, `[' is where `{' used to be, `{' is where `(' used to be
-- it is convenient in both programming (maybe if I programmed much in
some curly-braces-laden language (now I do mostly Python), I'd think
about other place for {}) and writing normal text). .Xmodmap can also
give symbols to so-called multimedial-keys (play/pause, mute, e-mail,
WWW, etc.) -- I own a keyboard with these since maybe two weeks so
I haven't yet configured them all optimally but ejecting / injecting /
/ mounting CD-ROM with one keypress is surely convenient.
On older versions of XF86 one can also map windows keys to Super with
.Xmodmap. I don't remember how exactly to spell it but it shouldn't
take much googling.
I use XKB though to switch my Caps Lock and left Ctrl key (like Sun
keyboards have) -- this one I found in docs. ;) In Emacs it makes
*big* difference.
> And I also bind the otherwise useless "Pause" key on PC keyboards. ;)
Oh. It's really useless here! ;) I've grown up on DOS where
Ctrl+Break was one of more important combos -- it was used to force
program to stop (like Ctrl+C on Un*x console). When I run out of
`multimedia' keys I'll consider using it. :)
> Maciek> There is no universally-good configuration and I sculpted
> Maciek> my own from ground up; it took some time but now I feel
> Maciek> that I'm tha boss on my desktop and it behaves as I need.
>
> Yeah. It takes may be a few hours to read the FVWM man page and 1 or
> 2 more hours to try out the combinations that I like. But I've done
> this just twice or thrice (when I upgrade to a new version of fvwm and
> want to enjoy the new features) in the past 8 years. So, it's only
> maybe 20 hours in 8 years. The gained productivity of course pays
> that off.
And not only productivity -- configuring FVWM is just fun. Sawfish
was also fun and had some cool ideas but I couldn't stand its
everything-incompatible pseudo-Lisp (guy could just use Scheme if he
didn't like idea of using Common Lisp...) and at the time I used it it
was crashing frequently.
Maybe some plugin like fvwm-perl could be used to make FVWM talk
Common Lisp? Now THIS would be 1337! :)
--
__ Maciek Pasternacki <maciekp@japhy.fnord.org> [ http://japhy.fnord.org/ ]
`| _ |_\ / { (2a) No matter how hard you try, you can't make a baby in much
,|{-}|}| }\/less then 9 months;trying to speed this up *might* make it slower,
\/ |____/ but it won't make it happen any quicker. } ( RFC 1925 ) -><-
- Re: emacs for everything?, (continued)
- Re: emacs for everything?, Maciek Pasternacki, 2004/11/25
- Re: emacs for everything?, Kai Grossjohann, 2004/11/26
- Re: emacs for everything?, Maciek Pasternacki, 2004/11/27
- Re: emacs for everything?, Kai Grossjohann, 2004/11/27
- Re: emacs for everything?, Maciek Pasternacki, 2004/11/27
- Re: emacs for everything?, Kai Grossjohann, 2004/11/28
- Re: emacs for everything?, Daniel Pittman, 2004/11/27
- Message not available
- Re: emacs for everything?, Mike, 2004/11/25
- Re: emacs for everything?, Maciek Pasternacki, 2004/11/25
- Message not available
- Re: emacs for everything?, Lee Sau Dan, 2004/11/24
- Re: emacs for everything?,
Maciek Pasternacki <=
- Re: emacs for everything?, Leonardo Boiko, 2004/11/24
- Re: emacs for everything?, Maciek Pasternacki, 2004/11/24
- Re: emacs for everything?, Leonardo Boiko, 2004/11/24
- Message not available
- Re: emacs for everything?, Pascal Bourguignon, 2004/11/24
- Re: emacs for everything?, Maciek Pasternacki, 2004/11/25
- Message not available
- Re: emacs for everything?, Stefan Monnier, 2004/11/25
- Re: emacs for everything?, Maciek Pasternacki, 2004/11/25
- Message not available
- Re: emacs for everything?, Stefan Monnier, 2004/11/27
- Re: emacs for everything?, Maciek Pasternacki, 2004/11/27
- Message not available
- Re: emacs for everything?, Mathias Dahl, 2004/11/25