🚀 go-pugleaf

On 25 Jan 1993 12:57:32 GMT mjo@iao.ford.com (Mike O'Connor) said:
]In article <C194wA.4A6@compsci.liverpool.ac.uk> rkl@csc.liv.ac.uk
](Richard Lloyd) writes:
]:There are several users at our site who don't like the way Elm only requires
]:a single keypress (without RETURN to confirm) for its operations, often leading
]This sounds like a good idea, but after having had an "opportunity" to
]look at Elm source code recently, it looks like it'd be evil to implement!

May I suggest that this be put on the list for version 3, selectable
via an option?
What imho seems to be the matter here, is that one would like to
enter ALL the parameters needed for a whole command in one shot,
review the input, and only *then* give the final go-ahead.
This is a totally different behaviour from what "elm" currently
shows; prompts would become unnecessary.  Thus less screen-changes
and less distractions...

Hmm..  I see something nice here; this makes it easy to implement:
   r)eply -i)nclude -n)ewsgroup -F)ile relevant-stuff  <RETURN>
or:
   r -inF relevant-stuff  <RETURN>

Normally, replies *should* by default go to the address in the
Reply-To:, Sender:, or From: field (in descending order of
priority).  But here one could override that with "-n" (for mail
from a newsgroup), or "-s) for the sender address, or "-f" for the
"From:" address.

Note btw that Elm v2.3 does *not* adhere to the above-mentioned
priority re Reply-To:/Sender:/From: as specified in RFC-822.
(Syd?)  Is this also the case for v2.4?


Regards.
$$\    F. Scott Ophof

--------------------------->  I speak *only* for *myself*  <-----
My credo:  Computers exist for OUR benefit, NEVER vice-versa.