[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
bug#29272: 26.0.90; "C-h k C-mouse-3" followed by menu selection asks fo
From: |
Alan Mackenzie |
Subject: |
bug#29272: 26.0.90; "C-h k C-mouse-3" followed by menu selection asks for more keys |
Date: |
Fri, 1 Dec 2017 16:57:40 +0000 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.7.2 (2016-11-26) |
Hello, Eli.
On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 20:56:30 +0200, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> > Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2017 18:37:17 +0000
> > Cc: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>,
> > Noam Postavsky <npostavs@users.sourceforge.net>, 29272@debbugs.gnu.org
> > From: Alan Mackenzie <acm@muc.de>
> > Personally, I think the value t is a bad idea, and we should obsolete
> > it.
> That's not going to fly. We have absolutely no reason for making this
> obsolete.
> in any case, this discussion is not about double-click-time's purpose,
> it's about what should "C-h k" when it is not a number. I proposed a
> practical solution; does anyone see a problem with it?
> > Maybe we should interpret t as a moderately long finite interval, say 10
> > seconds.
> 10 seconds is too long, I think 1 sec is much better.
I hope I'm not bikeshedding, but 1 second may be too little. I'm
thinking about two use cases: (i) where a user's mouse button is almost
worn out, and it takes several attempted presses before one registers;
(ii) A disabled user who has physical difficulty in pressing the mouse
button, and needs that extra time to do so. Either of these may be a
reason for setting double-click-time to t.
Maybe not as long as 10s. How about compromising with the geometric
mean of 1s and 10s, namely 3.162s?
--
Alan Mackenzie (Nuremberg, Germany).
- bug#29272: 26.0.90; "C-h k C-mouse-3" followed by menu selection asks for more keys,
Alan Mackenzie <=