On Sun, Sep 09, 2007 at 11:12:42AM -0400, Lee Page wrote: > Yes, I don't see ever using the X interface. The curses interface is fast > when working on machines in other countries, and you never have to worry > about how compatible your X server is. Though, you do have certain > terminal anomalies to worry about. I also make heavy use of the Curses interface, as I do much remote maintenance of machines. The current development version (pickable with Git) adds an interesting fix to a rather annoying issue on the Curses port: search, replace and other functions that ask forever that pesky "Case sensitive (Y/N)" question can be answered by pressing ENTER (meaning "the previous selection"). It's still annoying, but a bit less. > Is there a way to genericize the tui interface so that one interface would > work for both? I'm afraid TUI is a bit too text-oriented to be useful, but probably can be done. Regarding the multiple-sequence keys, I'm thinking about a pretty interface that could be: mp.keycodes['ctrl-x'] = {}; mp.keycodes['ctrl-x']['ctrl-s'] = mp.actions['save']; mp.keycodes['ctrl-x']['ctrl-x'] = mp.actions['cut-mark']; That is, assigning a hash to a keycode (instead of an action). This could be multiplexed recursively without adding any complexity. What do you think? -- Angel Ortega http://www.triptico.com -- To unsubscribe, send mail to mp-unsubscribe_lists.triptico.com.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Thu Apr 10 2008 - 08:59:26 CEST