r...@knighten.org writes:
> Would you elaborate on this? I can guess what "fundamentally flawed in
> its overdependence on key bindings" means but I expect my guess is acutally
> wrong.
Key bindings form the only customizable user interface in Emacs. (There are
also menus, but they are still
Uday Reddy writes:
> My principle is that key bindings are meant for frequently-used commands.
> For others, the best option is to define aliases, e.g.,
>
> (defalias 'imap 'vm-visit-imap-folder)
>
> I actually believe that the Emacs architecture is fundamentally flawed in
> its overdep
blueman writes:
> Unfortunately, vm itself is not just binding heavy but actually binding
> dependent in that some key functions *only* seem to work when called
> from a key binding rather than from M-x. I think this is true btw for
> certain mark-related functions with next command uses marks. So
Uday Reddy writes:
> My principle is that key bindings are meant for frequently-used commands.
> For others, the best option is to define aliases, e.g.,
>
> (defalias 'imap 'vm-visit-imap-folder)
>
> I actually believe that the Emacs architecture is fundamentally flawed in
> its overdependence o
blueman writes:
> For example, it would be nice to have a single vm-visit-any-folder
> function which would visit local vs. IMAP folders depending on whether
> there is a ':' (colon) in the name.
>
> For example:
> 'foldername' = local folder 'foldername
> ':foldername' = IMAP folder on d
