On 30 Sep 2004, Ted Zlatanov wrote: > Why would you want to cripple the network socket concept in favor of a > FIFO? Typically you'd use a FIFO where performance is a concern, and > I don't think any of the operations I proposed would be > resource-intensive. Also, a local network connection is very fast - > depending on the particulars of the OS, it may be as fast as a FIFO.
Not my area: I had the general impression using a fifo's would need less code adding to ion than a network interfaces, but I guess that's mistaken. > You should look into gnuclient/gnuserv or emacsclient, they do exactly > this sort of thing. You can get a new window to come up, which will > probably be convenient for you. I used to use this to edit mail in > mutt until I discovered Gnus. I really do want is to only have one emacs _window_ (ie one tab), not just one emacs process. A significant proportion of the time I get the file that I want to look at via some xterm command using emacsclient rather than opening it directly in emacs. (I find this more convenient because the shell in the xterm is often in the directory the file is in anyway, so I don't have to do all the typing to put the correct directory in front of the path when using find-file in emacs, or I can open files returned from a grep, etc.) If I got a new window each time I did this, I'd have 20-30 windows belonging to emacs at any given time to no purpose. But it's not that hard to open the file, then use the mouse to switch to my emacs window. I'm still trying to figure out how to reduce the number of xterm windows from about 30 to a smaller number whilst keeping the benefits of the separate bash history files in each window :-) -- __cheers, dave____________________________________________ www.inf.ed.ac.uk/people/staff/David_Tweed.html tel: +44 131 651 3447 fax: +44 131 651 3435 X wrote a book about this, which Y was carrying around for a long time with little discernible effect -- John Baez
