🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <18063@bellcore.bellcore.com> sjs@bellcore.com (Stan Switzer) writes:
> In article <6685@ficc.uu.net> peter@ficc.uu.net (Peter da Silva) writes:
> > This doesn't have to be handled with timing, though. I use such a tool,
> > and it works by seeing, on each click, whether you're still on the same
> > character. If so it cycles the scope.

> This is nice.  I assume that since a user coming back from coffee will
> probably jostle the mouse a bit he won't be confused by an invisible
> mode (i.e.: have already pressed the mouse twice, next press selects
> sentence).

Well, since the current scope is highlighted, it's not an invisible mode.

> > That's an implementation detail, then. On the Amiga, for instance, the
> > menus don't go through the layers system: the screen is frozen while the
> > menu is up, but because it's so fast the screen isn't frozen for very long.

> Dubious advantage.

Well, it's a tradeoff. The biggest overhead in windowing seems to be managing
the clipping lists rather than actually copying bits around. For something
that's guaranteed to be short duration (unless you replace your mouse buttons
with toggle switches :->) it's an OK tradeoff.

> Here's an idea: just put wheels on the keyboard and use the whole
> thing as a mouse!  You'd have plenty of buttons then. :-) :-)

I've seen things like this on synth keyboards: big sliding bars sitting
in front of the keyboard for you to move with the palm of your hand.

> A possible argument for the one-button mouse:  I just saw the new
> lap-top Mac.  It uses either a trackball or a mouse (comes with both).
> It is tricky enough to do pull-down menus and other click-drag-release
> functions when there is only one button (on the lap-Mac, they have a
> nice BIG thumb-button), on a three-button mouse you'd have to play
> some ugly games to get this to work right.

This is a case where falling back on two hands is reasonable. And another
reason not to use shift-clicking. Stick the buttons somewhere you can get
them with the left hand.
-- 
`-_-' Peter da Silva <peter@ficc.uu.net> <peter@sugar.hackercorp.com>.
 'U`  --------------  +1 713 274 5180.
"That particular mistake will not be repeated.  There are plenty of mistakes
 left that have not yet been used." -- Andy Tanenbaum (ast@cs.vu.nl)