Subject: [sup-talk] Jumping directly to thread # X

From: [email-masked] (Saji N Hameed)
Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2007 16:30:46 +0900

Dear All,

It would be nice to have a keystroke to jump directly to
any desired thread. Right now one has to do several page
up's or down's to select a thread.

Also while one is reading a message, it would be convenient
to have a key stroke that allows one to read the next
thread in the list. I guess I am supposed to do this using
'n' key stroke. However this appears to be associated with
search functionality.

saji

---

From: [email-masked] (William Morgan)
Date: Sun, 30 Dec 2007 13:21:33 -0800

Excerpts from Saji N Hameed's message of Tue Dec 11 23:30:46 -0800 2007:
> It would be nice to have a keystroke to jump directly to any desired
> thread. Right now one has to do several page up's or down's to select
> a thread.

This shouldn't be too hard. Anyone else want this?

> Also while one is reading a message, it would be convenient to have a
> key stroke that allows one to read the next thread in the list. I
> guess I am supposed to do this using 'n' key stroke. However this
> appears to be associated with search functionality.

",n" should now work.

-- 
William <wmorgan-sup at masanjin.net>

---

From: [email-masked] (Marcus Williams)
Date: Mon, 31 Dec 2007 14:34:27 +0000

> This shouldn't be too hard. Anyone else want this?

.. if it was mapped to :<n> or something it might be nice and vi like
:)

Cant see myself using it without also having an option to number the
threads, by the time you've counted to the one you want you might as
well have pressed down/up a few times. Equally if you're having to
press up/down too many times then a search to restrict the threads to
the set you're interested is usually better.

Marcus

---

From: [email-masked] (Nicolas Pouillard)
Date: Mon, 31 Dec 2007 17:51:51 +0100

> .. if it was mapped to :<n> or something it might be nice and vi like

+1 for :<command>

-- 
Nicolas Pouillard aka Ertai