On Sun, Sep 17, 2000 at 03:15:06AM +0100, Mark R Harding wrote:
> True enough but given that TB! runs under Windows exclusively (unless
> I really missing something...) then I think it is fair to assume that
> the Windows Keystroke standard is an acceptable common standard that
> everyone already knows... it may not be a pleasant fact but I'm sure
> it's true.
You keep missing the point. There is no standard! Yes, they adhere to
the CUA (I think that is it) standard but that doesn't define /EDITOR/
behavior only /KEYSTROKE/ behavior. It doesn't define free caret or not. It
doesn't define word wrapping or not. It only defines movement, highlighting,
cut/copy/paste. It doesn't even define move which is a basic edit command in
my eyes.
> had to edit files under unix on a regular basis that I really disliked
> the emacs based editors because the keystrokes required were
> completely alien to me.
Agreed. But I don't like how people keep calling it a standard when it is
not. "That isn't the standard way it works." Well, since there is no
standard defined /NONE/ of the editors work the standard way! In fact the
/ONLY/ "standard" editor that I know of is VI! Why? Because VI is the only
editor I know of that doesn't exist. Sure, there are programs called vi on
lots of unix systems, also a lot of variants of vi (vim, elvis, etc). However
the VI editor is defined in a paper separate of implementation.
> I guess we'll not get anywhere without an editor that suits our own
> preferences but for the majority of windows users that does mean 'what
> they already know' and TB! isn't that.
This is what I object to.
How do you reflow a paragraph in the majority of Windows applications?
Oh, yeah. Since the CUA standard only covered keystrokes and they know
the CUA standard keystrokes /EVERYTHING ELSE/ is subject to change on an
editor by editor basis. That is why I continually refute the notion of a
"standard" way an editor acts under Windows and why it is "easier" to have
everything integrated. The plain and simple fact is each "standard" editor is
different than every other "standard" editor on this platform and the user is
forced to /LEARN A NEW EDITOR/ every program. TB! is no different.
> If they don't have the time/inclination to learn then they'll pass it over.
Bingo. And they have to learn each time.
> I'm glad I invested the time to learn the editor - it's a benfit to me but
> maybe I'm just one of the lucky ones...
I'm glad I took the time to learn VIM. So when will TB! let me use it
instead of hobbling me with its editor?
--
Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your
ICQ: 5107343 | main connection to the switchboard of souls.
-------------------------------+---------------------------------------------
--
--------------------------------------------------------------
View the TBUDL archive at http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com
To send a message to the list moderation team double click here:
<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To Unsubscribe from TBUDL, double click here and send the message:
<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--------------------------------------------------------------
You are subscribed as : archive@jab.org
