Re: save the separate minibuffer! (not!)

Article View: gnu.epoch.misc

Article #1002

#1002

From: rich waters
Date: Thu, 11 Mar 1993 07:08

6 lines
700 bytes

I think a separate minibuffer is great.  

I would miss it.

    -rich

Technical Details

Message-ID: <1993Mar11.070837.15266@netcom.com>

Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!wupost!csus.edu!netcom.com!raw

References: <ROBERT.93Mar5182443@compton.cogsci.ed.ac.uk>

Show Full Headers

Complete Article Headers

X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: fc7ee,6e300946f9a3edb7
X-Google-Attributes: gidfc7ee,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 1993-03-11 01:21:21 PST
Newsgroups: gnu.epoch.misc
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!wupost!csus.edu!netcom.com!raw
From: raw@netcom.com (rich waters)
Subject: Re: save the separate minibuffer! (not!)
Message-ID: <1993Mar11.070837.15266@netcom.com>
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest) 
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL6]
References: <ROBERT.93Mar5182443@compton.cogsci.ed.ac.uk>
Distribution: gnu
Date: Thu, 11 Mar 1993 07:08:37 GMT
Lines: 7

Reply to Parent Message