🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <6647@ficc.uu.net>, peter@ficc (Peter da Silva) writes:
>I agree. That's a total botch. That's why I didn't suggest it.

Sorry for the mis-understanding. Terminology can be confusing,
especially when each of us understand our window system so clearly! :-)

>> But inside the window, you can make that program use any sort of
>> chord like
>> 	 Shift-Meta-Control-DoubleClick left, middle and right mouse buttons.
>
>Noooooo!
>
>chording/double-clicks/etc are a kludge. One button -> one action. If you
>want to do something more complex, use a menu or a poke point.

Nooooooo!

First of all, I want a window system that allows me to
customize the HECK out of it. I want to be as efficient as possible.

Also, as I have stated before, The use of such complex bindings
should be as accelerators - unnecessary for the new user, but
available for the power user.

If such accelerators are there and you don't want to define/use them, fine!

But if I want to do this, I should have the ability to make myself
more efficient.

I must admit that I don't often do this. There are lots of key combinations
in emacs that I have not memorized yet, and I have been using emacs for
two years. But that is beside the point. Next year I will use them.

Here are some specific examples of complex actions bound to chords
that I do not consider a "kludge".

1)
	I have the ability to point to any spot in my window and with a
Control-Meta Left click, I can execute a keyboard macro at the spot
I am pointing too. I don't want a menu. (I don't know what a "poke point" is.)
I just want to (doit) at the exact point I am pointing too.

Any other method would slow me down. Why on earth would I want a menu
for such an action?

2) Many mouse based editors support single clicks to select a character,
and multiple clicks to select words, sentences, paragraphs or entire documents.

This is a great timesaver! I don't have to use it, but since it's
there, I use it all the time and miss it when it's not available.  As
an example, if I wanted to include an entire file in another document,
and I had a viewing window open on that file, I routinely do a
secondary paste, which is accomplished by
	a) Holding down the paste button
	b) Moving the mouse to the other window with the text to be included
	   It can be ANYWHERE inside the window.
	c) Click the mouse 4 times to select the entire document
	d) Release the paste button.

In the window system I am using now, two clicks selects text in word mode,
three clicks is line mode and four clicks is the entire document.

If instead I wanted to select just a few paragraphs, I would use three
clicks to select the first line and a single click on the last line.
The clicks can be anywhere on that line, so I can quickly select lines
without precisely positioning the mouse.

This is very easy to learn AND fast in execution.

It is also consistent. The more clicks you use the larger the unit of
selection. Also - when you do a multiple click, the position of the
insert point is rounded to the nearest unit.  So if I triple click on
a line, the text insertion will be either the beginning or the end of
the line, depending on which end I was closest too.

Some window system have no way to efficiently select blocks of text or to
position the insertion point at even unit boundries.

Using chords/multiple-clicks allows the power user to quickly and
accurately perform the desired function.

Multiple clicks are also the second easiest thing to do with a mouse.
Any other action, like poping up a menu, really slows down the user
(With the exception of Don Hopkins Pie Menus, which can be selected before the
menu appears. You can even select an item from  a nested menu before it appears!)

I could go on and on. I hope I have made my point.

I just had a flashback. I remember a conversation I had a year ago when
someone was arguing that there was no need for more than one mouse button.

My argument defending multiple mouse buttons is very similar to my defending
chords and multiple clicks.

Yes! you can get by with a single mouse button.
Yes you can get by without double-clicks and keyboard-click combinations.

But just because YOU may not want to use them doesn't mean they are a "kludge".

I will agree that some systems are a kludge. But certainly not ALL.

--
Bruce G. Barnett	<barnett@crd.ge.com>   uunet!crdgw1!barnett