[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: info-mode needs history navigation.
From: |
Kevin A. Burton |
Subject: |
Re: info-mode needs history navigation. |
Date: |
04 Nov 2001 13:11:49 -0800 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.0808 (Gnus v5.8.8) Emacs/21.1 |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Eli Zaretskii <address@hidden> writes:
> On 3 Nov 2001, Kevin A. Burton wrote:
>
> > 1. remove Info-last and create two new functions and bindings including
> > Info-history-forwards and Info-history-backwards
> >
> > - PROS: elegant and straight forward.
> >
> > - CONS: breaks backwards compatibility and requires users to learn new
> > key
> > bindings.
> >
> > 2. Keep Info-last and write a new function which handles forward
> > navigation. I
> > don't know what to call this new function (any suggestions?).
> >
> > - PROS: keeps backwards compatibility, preserves key bindings.
> >
> > - CONS: leaves us in an ackward position because the alternative nav
> > function (Info-first) is little confusing.
> >
> > 3. Keep Info-last but this will be an alias for Info-history-backwards and
> > pursue case 1.
> >
> > - PROS: elegant and straight forward. Keeps backwards compatibility,
> > preserves key bindings.
> >
> > - CONS: ???
> >
> > I think this pretty much sums it up... I would prefer ot implement use case
> > 3...
>
> I'm afraid I don't really see the big difference. ;-)
> i
> The real issue is this: Info currently maintains the visited places in
> stack-like fashion. So if you press `l', the last place is popped off the
> stack, and is thereafter gone. So you cannot implement Info-history-forward;
> you need to change the way visited places are stored.
Yes... I know. Info-last would either be removed or rewritten.
We can't live with the stack being damaged.
> When this is done, it doesn't make any sense to keep the old stack-based
> approach and the new one. We simply rebind `l' to the new command, and be
> done with that. Voila--users don't need to learn anything new, if they don't
> want to: `l' works as before; while those who do want a new feature will use
> the new Info-history-forward command.
>
> Am I missing something?
I think so... did you read my proposal? I think I just said everything *you*
said and put it into case 3.
So we are in agreement that case 3 is the solution.
Kevin
- --
Kevin A. Burton ( address@hidden, address@hidden, address@hidden )
Location - San Francisco, CA, Cell - 415.595.9965
Jabber - address@hidden, Web - http://relativity.yi.org/
The gears of the digital revolution are turning faster than the wheels of
justice. -- Andrew Pollack
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Get my public key at: http://relativity.yi.org/pgpkey.txt
iD8DBQE75aisAwM6xb2dfE0RAjRlAJ9QZGiyGvnJtIOQRmrgP7N4SRggDwCgz/iJ
2poxnBb67owAqOhBGX1zDvY=
=CGym
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----