Re: Why do we need a number of different terminal modes in Emacs?

[Emanuel Berg]

Hikaru Ichijyo <ichijyo@macross.sdf.jp> writes:

> From what I've gathered, the primary advantage of
> working with the UNIX shell from inside Emacs (in
> programs like 'shell') is that unlike in a normal
> terminal, you can cursor anywhere, up to output that
> has already been emitted, and do regular Emacs
> editor operations on command output after the fact.

Yes, at least in today's world, that's the advantage:
complete integration of the material
inputted/outputted, the same editing keys, and the
same configuration/documentation interface.

In my experience, this need isn't as big with the
shell as it is with for example mail. But sometimes
there is an advantage to have it. Then, if you don't
do it in Emacs, mostly it is about being able to cut
and paste from/to Emacs/the shell. If you have that,
as that isn't done that often to begin with, you can
do it when you need it and that's enough.

But of course the in-Emacs terminal emulators serve a
purpose, and if the OP isn't happy with them, he is
encouraged to improve them starting today.

> They're all just there for conveniences though. If
> you find yourself needing a fast, efficient terminal
> that just does the job the way you expect, run rxvt
> (standalone). Heresy as it might be, you don't have
> to do everything in Emacs! (Uh-oh, I said it now...)

In X, apart from xterm and rxvt, there is also urxvt
("u" is for Unicode, "r" for reduced, there rest
should be clear).

If you don't use the terminal emulators in Emacs, then
you need a fast transition from Emacs to the shell. I
run Emacs in the Linux VT, in /dev/tty1; in 2-6 I have
tmux/zsh; and then I can switch very quick from Emacs
to the shell with M-l, and back with M-j (right and
left: that works in the shell ttys and even in X with
xbindkeys).

Here is some material on that:

    http://user.it.uu.se/~embe8573/conf/remap.inc
    http://user.it.uu.se/~embe8573/conf/.tmux.conf

-- 
underground experts united