[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [21.1.90]: point put at point-min in *compilation*
From: |
Richard Stallman |
Subject: |
Re: [21.1.90]: point put at point-min in *compilation* |
Date: |
Wed, 06 Feb 2008 19:44:22 -0500 |
But scrolling still has to occur for you to be able to see if there's
anything to read.
That is not true. Starting a new compilation erases the buffer.
So you will certainly see that the output has started. Then you
can read it at your own pace.
Or you can type M-> if I want to have it all scroll past.
With a default of t, you only need to
intervene if you see something you want to linger on - and only then if
the compilation did not stop anyway because the something was a
compilation error - and you get the progress for free.
If it scrolls automatically I often can't even SEE if there is
something I want to look at. And supposing I do see, by the time
I can get my hands on the keyboard to type anything, a lot more
output will usually have come out.
My decision is not to change the default to t.
Stefan said:
Has someone tried to use my new compilation-auto-jump-to-first-error?
It stops the scrolling as soon as the first error is spotted.
I have not tried it, but it sounds like a good idea.
Is it installed already?
Perhaps it should be another value of compilation-scroll-output,
rather than a separate option.
- RE: [21.1.90]: point put at point-min in *compilation*, (continued)
Re: [21.1.90]: point put at point-min in *compilation*, Chong Yidong, 2008/02/04
Re: [21.1.90]: point put at point-min in *compilation*, Richard Stallman, 2008/02/04
- RE: [21.1.90]: point put at point-min in *compilation*, Marshall, Simon, 2008/02/05
- Re: [21.1.90]: point put at point-min in *compilation*, Stefan Monnier, 2008/02/05
- Re: [21.1.90]: point put at point-min in *compilation*, Richard Stallman, 2008/02/06
- Re: [21.1.90]: point put at point-min in *compilation*, David Kastrup, 2008/02/06
- RE: [21.1.90]: point put at point-min in *compilation*, Marshall, Simon, 2008/02/06
- Re: [21.1.90]: point put at point-min in *compilation*,
Richard Stallman <=
- Re: [21.1.90]: point put at point-min in *compilation*, Stefan Monnier, 2008/02/06
- Re: [21.1.90]: point put at point-min in *compilation*, Richard Stallman, 2008/02/07
- RE: [21.1.90]: point put at point-min in *compilation*, Marshall, Simon, 2008/02/07
- Re: [21.1.90]: point put at point-min in *compilation*, Miles Bader, 2008/02/07
- Re: [21.1.90]: point put at point-min in *compilation*, David Kastrup, 2008/02/07
- RE: [21.1.90]: point put at point-min in *compilation*, Marshall, Simon, 2008/02/07
- Re: [21.1.90]: point put at point-min in *compilation*, David Kastrup, 2008/02/07
- RE: [21.1.90]: point put at point-min in *compilation*, Marshall, Simon, 2008/02/07
- Re: [21.1.90]: point put at point-min in *compilation*, David Kastrup, 2008/02/07
- RE: [21.1.90]: point put at point-min in *compilation*, Marshall, Simon, 2008/02/07