Re: lynx-dev LYNX: reverse-search

[David Combs]

On Tue, Mar 30, 1999 at 12:05:33AM -0500, Chuck Martin wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 29, 1999 at 07:25:05PM -0800, David Combs wrote:
> <snip>
> I don't see how this would work.  For example, if I wanted to search for
> the word "Doctor" in the current page, I would presumably press "?doctor?"
> (since searches are presently case insensitive--using an uppercase D
> would have the same effect in my example).  As soon as I pressed the ?,
> I would be taken to the help page.  The result of pressing d at this
> point depends on what is in my help page, but if there is a link on my
> screen, I would now be downloading the file it pointed to.  Unless you're
> suggesting that we change the behavior of ? to require a carriage return
> (or enter key) following it to get to the help page, ...
<snip>

The real problem is that we've used all the keys for commands.

PLEASE TELL ME: what is the PROBLEM with adding multiple-char
commands?

I myself have been pleading for this for years.

What would emacs be with only single-char commands, and no
M-x possible?

What would vi or vim be without the ":<mult-char>" cmds?

These products would have simply stopped growing EONS ago,
and would be FAR less useful to us today.

---

For lynx, is it an implementation problem?

Please, what IS the problem?  Why NOT multiple-char commands?

---

In several years on this list, I have never seen a discussion
of why lynx should NOT have multiple-char commands (of course,
with some kind of prefix to say "here comes a mult-char cmd",
and that makes a <return> necessary").

Maybe someone can explain the reluctance, so I (and others?) can
UNDERSTAND it, and so we (I) will stop suggesting it.


David