From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: nicolas.pouillard@gmail.com (Nicolas Pouillard) Date: Fri, 10 Apr 2009 10:36:16 +0200 Subject: [sup-talk] Read only mode for sup In-Reply-To: <1239297831-sup-5831@entry> References: <1239128578-sup-6684@ausone.local> <1239146860-sup-6624@baad> <1239217190-sup-5981@chigamba> <1239226676-sup-7216@entry> <1239297831-sup-5831@entry> Message-ID: <1239352575-sup-724@ausone.inria.fr> Excerpts from William Morgan's message of Thu Apr 09 19:30:09 +0200 2009: > Reformatted excerpts from William Morgan's message of 2009-04-08: > > One easy thing to comes to mind would be to have buffer-list-mode > > (which is what you get when you hit B) sort the buffer list by last > > access. Remap that to something like ";" and you have one-handed > > buffer- switching with minimal keystrokes. > > Ok, I've done this on branch 'better-buffer-list', which I've merged > into next. Pull and see how you guys like it. Summary: > > 1. 'b' rolls the buffer forward as usual. > 2. 'B' now rolls the buffer backwards like in the olden days. > 3. ';' pulls up the buffer list, which is now sorted by access time, > colorized to show "system" vs non-"system" buffers, and has little > stars for buffers with unsaved content. > 4. '+' is now the apply-to-tagged command. > > Sorry for changing so many keymappings, but I really wanted ';' so that, > with 'j' and 'k', you can swap buffers really quickly with just one > hand. Since that freed up B, I figured I'd reenable the old behavior, > and '+' kinda makes sense for apply-to-tagged anyways. > > Nicolas, I had to revert your "Buffer switching, 'bn' for the next one > and 'bp' for the previous" change in next. I hope you're not offended! :) I'm not offended, I just wanted to tend to more scalable bindings, where a meaningful letter is kept to be the leading one for more advanced bindings on a particular topic. Moreover optimizing bindings for QUERTY keymap does not make sense for other people... Personally I use and prefer DVORAK. -- Nicolas Pouillard