1241Re: CUA support - update
- Oct 18, 2004--- In firstname.lastname@example.org, Jon Green <jon@j...> wrote:
> Would standardizing the GUI key bindings be sufficient ?Probably yes. I used RHIDE once, and it was pure DOS and fully
configurable with the keyboard.
jasspa's actual user setup is quite nice, but someone already
mentioned it's non-standard things, and I undoubtely agree.
> Should we consider a move to a native GUI for dialog boxes etc. ?Please no! No need for that!
> a) Is all of this effort worth it ?
> b) Would MicroEmacs become "BloatedMicroEmacs" or "MegaEmacs" ?Yes.
> c) Would it be more frustrating to use ?For newbies, these changes would be good. But I don't think we want
> d) Would it make it more usable ?
the new user to get used to menus -- everything should be keyboard-
> Why do you use MicroEmacs ?I needed the smallest windows' emacs that I could find. jasspa has 4MB
(~1MB zipped up) and no need to install. For me, it is good enough.
> What do you want as a user from MicroEmacs ?I wanted Emacs-like editing on windows, with the smaller possible
installer (no installing and small .zip file is even better), to put
on a mini-CD. XEmacs's netinstaller is 97KB, but what if I don't have
- << Previous post in topic Next post in topic >>