help-gnu-emacs
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Pressing ? does not allow window scrolling through the list of info


From: uzibalqa
Subject: Re: Pressing ? does not allow window scrolling through the list of info commands
Date: Fri, 07 Jul 2023 19:11:01 +0000

------- Original Message -------
On Saturday, July 8th, 2023 at 7:06 AM, Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> wrote:


> > From: Yuri Khan yuri.v.khan@gmail.com
> > Date: Sat, 8 Jul 2023 01:28:29 +0700
> > Cc: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org
> > 
> > On Fri, 7 Jul 2023 at 13:39, Eli Zaretskii eliz@gnu.org wrote:
> > 
> > > > However, what is the reason for that event loop?
> > > 
> > > The reason is to allow return to the manual with minimal fuss. As the
> > > user who invokes "?" is very likely to be a newbie to Emacs, having
> > > them to deal with buffers and windows at this point is unwise, to say
> > > the least.
> > 
> > ‘help-mode-map’ has ‘q’ bound to ‘quit-window’ and that’s the minimal
> > fuss way to return from the help window. It also would help build
> > habits that work with a wide set of buffers in Emacs.
> 
> 
> And how will we tell the user that 'q' quits? In the echo-area,
> perhaps?
> 
> > As it is, the user has to build three sets of habits: (1) for the
> > rudimentary Info-summary modal event loop where SPC scrolls up and
> > anything else quits; (2) for modes that inherit from special-mode
> > where SPC scrolls up, DEL and S-SPC scroll down, ‘q’ quits, and all
> > familiar keys work; and (3) for the full experience editable buffers
> > where you have to scroll with Page Up/Down and have no notion of
> > quitting.
> 
> 
> You exaggerate the problem. A typical user of computers these days
> needs much more than 3 sets of habits for similar actions. And
> scrolling with SPC in Emacs is quite a widely-used paradigm.

How does one scroll up again, it is not evident how.
 
> > > I'm not saying I object to adding more keys to scroll the display
> > > there, but the simplicity of going back to the manual should be
> > > preserved.
> > 
> > (Hand-written whitespace-ignoring minimal diff follows. I signed the
> > paperwork some time ago and it should be valid for now.)
> 
> 
> Thanks, but this is not the right place for posting patches.



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]