Re: why must emacs depend on sound packages?
On Mon, May 11, 2009 at 11:47:46AM EDT, Barclay, Daniel wrote:
[..]
> Are you still talking in the context of Emacs? If so:
>
> You won't need to reach the arrow keys, etc., once you've learned the
> traditional Emacs movement keystrokes. (In fact, that would also
> apply to vi.) But you need the control key in a reachable place so
> you can use those traditional keystrokes (reasonably).
Sure.. I use vim rather than vi but the "command-mode" default key
mapping, for instance, is pretty awful.
> > Not to mention double modifiers such as Alt+Ctrl .. !!
>
> Note that you can type Esc as a prefix for Meta in place of pressing
> Alt as a modifier for Meta.
Too far to reach.. and on my laptop, <Esc> is a half-sized key.
> > Even stuff like Ctrl-X Ctrl-F for frequently needed does not strike
> > me as ergonomically sound.
> At least for that particular key combination, it sounds like you
> haven't tried it enough times to notice how easy it gets.
>
> For that one in particular, you can just roll your hand over the three
> keys.
>
> That is, you don't have to do the sequence Control-down, x-down, x-up,
> Control-up, Control-down, f-down, f-up, Control-up.
>
> You can go: Control-down, x-down, f-down, Control-up, x-up, f-up; and
> that can be done in one rolling motion in about 1/3 of a second.
More like one tenth of a second for an average typist.. Odd that emacs
should advertise this as Ctrl-X Ctrl-F.. it should be represented as
something like Ctrl-XF.. or Ctrl+{XF}, maybe..?
Perhaps I'm the only one who finds this misleading.. :-)
> Sure, not every keystroke combination is that easy, but many are
> easier than they seem initially.
Where the above no longer works for me is when the two action keys do
not belong to the same half of the keyboard - such as Ctrl-X Ctrl-P,
because I would use my right thumb to action the Control key, the left
hand ring finger to hit X, and then would be stuck having to maintain
the right Control key depressed and hit the "P" key with my right pinky.
> If you want to and have time to give Emacs a fair shake, use it long
> enough for you fingers to learn the more common keystrokes, and then
> see if you like Emacs' style of commands or not.
Will do, thanks much for your comments.
> > I do like the emacs bindings in the shell, though .. takes a bit of
> > practice before they become second nature, but it's worth it.. once
> > you get there, you fly.
> I think your last 6 six words apply to Emacs too (as long as the
> control key is in the right place, or another other place that's as
> convenient for you).
Once I got rid of the mouse, came another challenge that I had not
anticipated: finding a reasonable tradeoff between keeping the set of
keyboard shortcuts minimal without sacrificing too much in terms of
speed and efficiency. Obviously much easier to achieve with a line-mode
editor such as the one provided by readline than screen-mode editors
such as vim or emacs.
CJ
Reply to: