[9fans] sam chatter

[9fans] sam chatter

[steve.simon]

Hi,

I do have two changes for sam on my to-do list:

Standardisation of the control sequence for carriage return - under
plan9 its Ctrl-M whilst on the Windows version it is Ctrl-J
and as I tend to work in very mixed enviroments this bites me,
often; I know you can just cut and paste the
 character
but typing is easier.

Also the current Plan9 release has a review key
to add to its view key, the older sams do not.

These are on my to-do list (somewhere)

-Steve

Re: [9fans] sam chatter

[Derek Fawcus]

On Fri, Jul 04, 2003 at 10:21:58AM +0100, steve.simon@snellwilcox.com wrote:
>
> Also the current Plan9 release has a review key
> to add to its view key, the older sams do not.

If you're referring to the scroll back key binding's then these exist
in the '94 copy of sam for X11 - bound to XK_Up and XK_Prior.

DF

Re: [9fans] sam chatter

[Dan Cross]

Perhaps this will seem sacreligous, but I'd like to see the following
changes in sam, myself:

	(1) Dragging below the boundary of the current window should
	    cause the window to scroll, selecting new text as it
	    appears, as it does in acme.
	(2) The system and sam snarf buffers should be merged.
	(3) Unix sam's samterm interface should be updated
	    to look like the (much more asthetically pleasing)
	    Plan 9 version.  By this, I mean in terms of
	    color schemes, et al.
	(4) The interface should support mouse chording ala acme and rio.

Personally, I think this would make sam much more usable and attractive,
particularly under Unix.

	- Dan C.

Re: [9fans] sam chatter

[rob pike, esq.]

> 	(1) Dragging below the boundary of the current window should
> 	    cause the window to scroll, selecting new text as it
> 	    appears, as it does in acme.
> 	(2) The system and sam snarf buffers should be merged.
> 	(3) Unix sam's samterm interface should be updated
> 	    to look like the (much more asthetically pleasing)
> 	    Plan 9 version.  By this, I mean in terms of
> 	    color schemes, et al.
> 	(4) The interface should support mouse chording ala acme and rio.

i tried to implement both (1) and (4) some years ago and had trouble
because samterm is not in the same address space as sam.  this really
complicates the implementation.  that's not to say it's impossible,
just that a few hours' attack by me led nowhere.

(2) was a consequence of running over 1200 baud when sam was first
written.  you didn't want every cut and paste to bounce off the remote
end at that speed.  nowadays that argument has less weight.  on the
other hand, i still kinda like that you can have an editing session
that doesn't corrupt what you have in rio's snarf buffer.  i tried the
unified way in acme and i often (not always) miss the old way.

(3) is of course trivial and of course long since done in plan 9.

-rob

Re: [9fans] sam chatter

[boyd, rounin]

no, i don't want to pull on the edge of a transperant object.

that's what 'resize' is for.

Re: [9fans] sam chatter

[John Murdie]

On Sat 2003-07-05 at 14:34 Dan Cross wrote:
>Perhaps this will seem sacreligous, but I'd like to see the following
>changes in sam, myself:
>
>        (1) Dragging below the boundary of the current window should
>            cause the window to scroll, selecting new text as it
>...
>        - Dan C.



On Sun, 2003-07-06 at 04:15, boyd, rounin wrote:
> no, i don't want to pull on the edge of a transperant object.
>
> that's what 'resize' is for.
>

I would like this feature (Ok, so I'm lazy for not having tried to code
it myself.) I fail to see, however, (if this is what Boyd is referring
to) how resize can be used conveniently to select a part of the document
being worked on that is taller than the display. ("sacreligious" and
"transparent", btw).

That said, I don't want to give the impression that I think direct
manipulation is _the answer_ to user interface problems. While it is
convenient for small and simple tasks, and an easy concept for a novice
to grasp, I believe that direct manipulation fails to take advantage of
the concept of _language_, and misses the riches that this idea offers
for communication with a computer. (Hence the sam command language, of
course.) I think that the Bruce Tognazzini's (http://www.asktog.com)
saying "power tools for power fools" is missing the point; why do so
many self-appointed HCI gurus apparently want to reduce us all to the
lowest common denominator?

John A. Murdie

Re: [9fans] sam chatter

[John Murdie]

On Mon, 2003-07-07 at 09:42, John Murdie wrote:
> ("sacreligious" ... btw).

No, "sacrilegious",  blush.

John A. Murdie

Re: [9fans] sam chatter

[Douglas A. Gwyn]

John Murdie wrote:
> On Sat 2003-07-05 at 14:34 Dan Cross wrote:
> >        (1) Dragging below the boundary of the current window should
> >            cause the window to scroll, selecting new text as it

I've sometimes wished for it.  The workaround is to save dot
within the current window, find the end of the desired text,
then set dot to range from the old value to the desired end.
If this is rarely needed then it's not worth the amount of
hackery that it would take to implement (I looked into doing
it once and gave up).

Re: [9fans] sam chatter

[rob pike, esq.]

>> On Sat 2003-07-05 at 14:34 Dan Cross wrote:
>> >        (1) Dragging below the boundary of the current window should
>> >            cause the window to scroll, selecting new text as it
>
> I've sometimes wished for it.  The workaround is to save dot
> within the current window, find the end of the desired text,
> then set dot to range from the old value to the desired end.
> If this is rarely needed then it's not worth the amount of
> hackery that it would take to implement (I looked into doing
> it once and gave up).

the 'k' command assists the work-around.

-rob

Re: [9fans] sam chatter

[boyd, rounin]

> the 'k' command assists the work-around.

yeah the non scrolling as you select has annoyed me a lot.

but, so does the scrolling menu stuff on button 3.

it's really hard to get right, so i use 'k'.

Re: [9fans] sam chatter

[Bruce Ellis]

>> (2) The system and sam snarf buffers should be merged.

I really like the way it is.  In fact I'm having a party next month
to celebrate 20 years of the same user interface.

I still miss the quality time you get to spend with the coffee
maker when your editor is downloading at 1200 baud.

Re: [9fans] sam chatter

[Markus Friedl]

On Sat, Jul 05, 2003 at 02:34:56PM -0400, Dan Cross wrote:
> 	(3) Unix sam's samterm interface should be updated
> 	    to look like the (much more asthetically pleasing)
> 	    Plan 9 version.  By this, I mean in terms of
> 	    color schemes, et al.

has anyone looked into 'updating' 9wm to the 4th edition look-and-feel?

Re: [9fans] sam chatter

[andrey mirtchovski]

On Tue, 8 Jul 2003, Markus Friedl wrote:

> has anyone looked into 'updating' 9wm to the 4th edition look-and-feel?
>

yes, without the colors (so just the feel):

	http://pages.cpsc.ucalgary.ca/~mirtchov/ports/9wm-1.2.tar.gz

I don't want to spend time putting colors in -- I get confused often enough
as it is with the exact looking black and white menu, that I kill drawterm
instead of a window in plan9 almost every day. it's frustrating.