Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

1241Re: CUA support - update

Expand Messages
  • Box-Plot
    Oct 18, 2004
    • 0 Attachment
      --- In jasspa@yahoogroups.com, 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. ?
      > a) Is all of this effort worth it ?

      Please no! No need for that!

      > b) Would MicroEmacs become "BloatedMicroEmacs" or "MegaEmacs" ?

      Yes.

      > c) Would it be more frustrating to use ?
      > d) Would it make it more usable ?

      For newbies, these changes would be good. But I don't think we want
      the new user to get used to menus -- everything should be keyboard-
      driven.

      > 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
      internet?

      --
      Box-Plot
      --
    • Show all 19 messages in this topic