[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: C-x 2 and C-x 3
|
From: |
Juri Linkov |
|
Subject: |
Re: C-x 2 and C-x 3 |
|
Date: |
Thu, 27 Oct 2011 09:36:01 +0300 |
|
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.0.90 (x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) |
>> Contrast "one above the other" - makes sense, and is fairly idiomatic
>> english (e.g. [1]), even if a bit of a mouthful.
>
> So then why not just rename it to split-window-one-above-the-other?
Because then more correct would be `split-window-one-below-the-other'
since the new window is below. But it's still ugly.
- Re: C-x 2 and C-x 3, (continued)
Re: C-x 2 and C-x 3, Jambunathan K, 2011/10/26
- Re: C-x 2 and C-x 3, Lennart Borgman, 2011/10/26
- Re: C-x 2 and C-x 3, David De La Harpe Golden, 2011/10/26
- Re: C-x 2 and C-x 3, Lennart Borgman, 2011/10/26
- Re: C-x 2 and C-x 3, Deniz Dogan, 2011/10/26
- Re: C-x 2 and C-x 3, David De La Harpe Golden, 2011/10/26
- Re: C-x 2 and C-x 3,
Juri Linkov <=
RE: C-x 2 and C-x 3, Drew Adams, 2011/10/26
Re: C-x 2 and C-x 3, Lennart Borgman, 2011/10/26
RE: C-x 2 and C-x 3, Drew Adams, 2011/10/26
Re: C-x 2 and C-x 3, David De La Harpe Golden, 2011/10/26
Re: C-x 2 and C-x 3, Dave Abrahams, 2011/10/26
Re: C-x 2 and C-x 3, Eli Zaretskii, 2011/10/26
Re: C-x 2 and C-x 3, Ulrich Mueller, 2011/10/26