Is it just me...
in [UK Linux]
|
Prev: Crash/reboot at boot.
Next: OPEN A SECRET
From: Folderol on 4 Nov 2009 19:30 On Wed, 4 Nov 2009 14:01:00 +0000 Tony Houghton <h(a)realh.co.uk> wrote: > On Wed, 4 Nov 2009 08:33:31 +0000 > Folderol <folderol(a)ukfsn.org> wrote: > > > For a similar reason I originally chose kwrite against gedit mostly > > because kwrite gives me a separate window for each view whereas gedit > > forces tabs on you. Copy and paste (or simply just looking for > > reminders) is dramatically faster with separate views - especially if > > you configure the desktop so that working inside a window work area > > does NOT bring the window to the front - something that is impossible > > in gnome :( > > You can drag the tabs out of gedit to get separate windows. And of > course it isn't impossible to prevent windows jumping to the front in > GNOME. Even metacity [1] can do it, but with side effects. I must admit I wasn't aware of that. Although I think it still doesn't allow multiple views on the same document. > [1] I don't know why GNOME still uses it as the default window manager. > It's a botched experiment attempting to prove that it's impossible to > write a window manager that's flexible, friendly and consistent, and > maintainable, which is all proven wrong by xfwm4. I'm an openbox user myself. I have very precise demands on how my WM behaves and this one works for me. -- Will J G
From: Tony Houghton on 4 Nov 2009 19:48 On Thu, 5 Nov 2009 00:30:14 +0000 Folderol <folderol(a)ukfsn.org> wrote: > On Wed, 4 Nov 2009 14:01:00 +0000 > Tony Houghton <h(a)realh.co.uk> wrote: > > > You can drag the tabs out of gedit to get separate windows. And of > > course it isn't impossible to prevent windows jumping to the front in > > GNOME. Even metacity [1] can do it, but with side effects. > > I must admit I wasn't aware of that. Although I think it still doesn't > allow multiple views on the same document. That's a nuisance. Neither does gvim, which also doesn't let you drag tabs out of their original window. These limitations, especially in conjunction with browsing compiler errors, drove me to write vixn. If I mention the word "Throwback" to you as an ex-RISC OS user, maybe you'll be wishing you liked vi now :-). > > [1] I don't know why GNOME still uses it as the default window manager. > > It's a botched experiment attempting to prove that it's impossible to > > write a window manager that's flexible, friendly and consistent, and > > maintainable, which is all proven wrong by xfwm4. > > I'm an openbox user myself. I have very precise demands on how my WM > behaves and this one works for me. I quite like that one too, but all its themes are almost identical and it needs quite a lot of tedious text editing to make it behave sensibly, whereas I can set up xfwm4 with a few clicks. IIRC I can even do it all with its standard config tool without having to run the "tweaks" one too. -- TH * http://www.realh.co.uk
From: Folderol on 5 Nov 2009 18:38 On Thu, 5 Nov 2009 00:48:48 +0000 Tony Houghton <h(a)realh.co.uk> wrote: > On Thu, 5 Nov 2009 00:30:14 +0000 > Folderol <folderol(a)ukfsn.org> wrote: > > > On Wed, 4 Nov 2009 14:01:00 +0000 > > Tony Houghton <h(a)realh.co.uk> wrote: > > > > > You can drag the tabs out of gedit to get separate windows. And of > > > course it isn't impossible to prevent windows jumping to the front in > > > GNOME. Even metacity [1] can do it, but with side effects. > > > > I must admit I wasn't aware of that. Although I think it still doesn't > > allow multiple views on the same document. > > That's a nuisance. Neither does gvim, which also doesn't let you drag > tabs out of their original window. These limitations, especially in > conjunction with browsing compiler errors, drove me to write vixn. If I > mention the word "Throwback" to you as an ex-RISC OS user, maybe you'll > be wishing you liked vi now :-). I did have a couple of stabs at both vi and emacs and found both of them infuriatingly arcane with the keyboard shortcuts for everything and no visible menu structure (it may have been there, but I couldn't find it). My 'raw' text editor of choice is therefore nano. I had a quick look at vixn and initial impressions are good. Simple, clean layout - exactly what I want for real work. I couldn't find search and replace. Are they there but on vi-like shorcuts? Seeing as we're talking re-tread RISC-OS, drag 'n drop load and save would be nice :) Hmm, throwback. Now you're teasing aren't you! > > > [1] I don't know why GNOME still uses it as the default window manager. > > > It's a botched experiment attempting to prove that it's impossible to > > > write a window manager that's flexible, friendly and consistent, and > > > maintainable, which is all proven wrong by xfwm4. > > > > I'm an openbox user myself. I have very precise demands on how my WM > > behaves and this one works for me. > > I quite like that one too, but all its themes are almost identical and > it needs quite a lot of tedious text editing to make it behave sensibly, > whereas I can set up xfwm4 with a few clicks. IIRC I can even do it all > with its standard config tool without having to run the "tweaks" one > too. I've almost forgotten how to set up openbox now. I spent a lot of time getting it exactly how I wanted, then stored the .config/openbox directory in as many places as I could think of! As well as this I have a slightly modified theme, that again is simple and uncluttered. Any new machine I set up just gets a copy of these chucked in straight away. One bit I'm rather proud of is an action set up so that a double-click on the title bar sets the dimensions of that window to 800x640 and centres it - very useful for misbehaving apps that set oversize windows so you can't reach the 'handles'. -- Will J G
From: Geoffrey Clements on 6 Nov 2009 04:44 "Folderol" <folderol(a)ukfsn.org> wrote in message news:20091105233858.0cb0c4a8(a)debian... > > I did have a couple of stabs at both vi and emacs and found both of > them infuriatingly arcane with the keyboard shortcuts for everything > and no visible menu structure (it may have been there, but I couldn't > find it). My 'raw' text editor of choice is therefore nano. > I too found the keybindings for vi a bit odd when I first tried it out but I also found that a little perserverence pays dividends and once you "get it" editing becomes very easy and quick. I'll let nix tell how good emacs is! :-) -- Geoff
From: Tony Houghton on 6 Nov 2009 08:14
On Thu, 5 Nov 2009 23:38:58 +0000 Folderol <folderol(a)ukfsn.org> wrote: > I did have a couple of stabs at both vi and emacs and found both of > them infuriatingly arcane with the keyboard shortcuts for everything > and no visible menu structure (it may have been there, but I couldn't > find it). My 'raw' text editor of choice is therefore nano. > > I had a quick look at vixn and initial impressions are good. Simple, > clean layout - exactly what I want for real work. I couldn't find search > and replace. Are they there but on vi-like shorcuts? Yes. Vixn's at that awkward stage where it does enough for my needs but hasn't attracted enough interest from other people to persuade me to make it "complete" when I've got other things to do. Its menus are very underdeveloped because I've never really used vim's menus (I used the console version as much as the GUI version). The keystrokes aren't really any harder to learn than any other powerful text editor's, probably easier, because you can perform complex operations by combining simple ones. But if you do want to learn vi, start with vim and graduate to vixn later, because vim has a good tutorial, while vixn only has auto-generated HTML crib-sheets. > Seeing as we're talking re-tread RISC-OS, drag 'n drop load and save > would be nice :) I think it does drag'n'drop loading. I could add saving too if it caught on with the ROX community, but I'm not sure whether that works with other file managers. > Hmm, throwback. Now you're teasing aren't you! No, I really did add a good throwback system because I was desperate for one. You still have to run make/gcc from within the text editor of course, but it's quite easy for it to parse the errors and warnings. As long as you're using GNU make and gcc of course! > > > > [1] I don't know why GNOME still uses it as the default window manager. > > > > It's a botched experiment attempting to prove that it's impossible to > > > > write a window manager that's flexible, friendly and consistent, and > > > > maintainable, which is all proven wrong by xfwm4. > > > > > > I'm an openbox user myself. I have very precise demands on how my WM > > > behaves and this one works for me. > > > > I quite like that one too, but all its themes are almost identical and > > it needs quite a lot of tedious text editing to make it behave sensibly, > > whereas I can set up xfwm4 with a few clicks. IIRC I can even do it all > > with its standard config tool without having to run the "tweaks" one > > too. > > I've almost forgotten how to set up openbox now. I spent a lot of time > getting it exactly how I wanted, then stored the .config/openbox > directory in as many places as I could think of! As well as this I have > a slightly modified theme, that again is simple and uncluttered. > > Any new machine I set up just gets a copy of these chucked in straight > away. > > One bit I'm rather proud of is an action set up so that a double-click > on the title bar sets the dimensions of that window to 800x640 and > centres it - very useful for misbehaving apps that set oversize > windows so you can't reach the 'handles'. > -- TH * http://www.realh.co.uk |