Stefan Monnier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> On modern graphical displays, this is a non-issue. On my standard >> laptop display, if the frame is appr. 80 columns wide, 20-25 buttons >> can be placed on the toolbar (i.e., all the standard and Info buttons >> would be visible); ... > I definitely do not want to encourage people to use windows larger than > 80 columns.
Indeed. It's actually very annoying to see comments like "on modern graphical displays, this is a non-issue." That simply isn't true. There are many different usage styles, and despite the increasing resolution of displays, you can't assume that everybody is using the one-huge-window-occupying-the-whole-screen style of usage that's common with MS apps, nor do I think you can assume that the majority are. [Like many others, I prefer to use my display's resolution to show multiple windows side by side when possible.] I don't think the "big windows vs. many small windows" issue is entirely arbitrary either: Emacs is a _text editor_, and typical text just isn't very readable past a certain width. Emacs can split windows horizontally, but unfortunately Emacs window layout is too dynamic to work very well if you require constraints on the layout like certain horizontal vertical splits. This is in contrast with graphical applications like spreadsheets, or mail readers with a rigid layout, which can use extra horizontal space much more effectively. >> Modern word processors/text editors often have two or three toolbar >> lines with dozens of buttons. ... >> A more extensive toolbar could help newbies learn/explore Emacs faster. > > Could be. Right now, the menus play this role. Yup. Emacs newbies I've observed seem quite happy with the menus (which are actually quite a bit easier to understand than the toolbar; the whole concept of "irritatingly slow to use" doesn't seem to be a problem for some reason... :-) I think in fact a big fancy toolbar is not particularly newbie-friendly at all. Indeed, even as an "expert" user, I'm somewhat daunted by typical toolbars and even after using a MS-style app for a long time, only really seem to end up using a few common toolbar buttons. I get the feeling that the massive extended toolbars really serve somewhat the same role in a typical MS app that keybindings do in Emacs: both are somewhat cryptic and take a fair bit of time to remember, but are probably faster and more convenient than the menus -- once you have learned them. Given Emacs' much larger command set and more sophisticated keybinding mechanisms, the typical expert user seems better served by just learning the keybindings. The exception is perhaps heavily-used commands like file save/open etc -- and those are exactly the things which are already in Emacs' toolbar. -miles -- Love is a snowmobile racing across the tundra. Suddenly it flips over, pinning you underneath. At night the ice weasels come. --Nietzsche _______________________________________________ emacs-pretest-bug mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-pretest-bug
