From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Message-ID: <13426df10611140525k68c31de1s525c816957352836@mail.gmail.com> Date: Tue, 14 Nov 2006 06:25:06 -0700 From: "ron minnich" To: "Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs" <9fans@cse.psu.edu> Subject: Re: [9fans] Samterm up down key patch In-Reply-To: <20061114104953.GA11151@shodan.homeunix.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <20061114104953.GA11151@shodan.homeunix.net> Topicbox-Message-UUID: de4fd7c0-ead1-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025 On 11/14/06, Martin Neubauer wrote: > Hello, > > I'm not quite convinced of the merit of that behaviour. The most direct > consequence is that it makes sam inconsistent with acme and rio windows. But maybe rio and acme are wrong. I guess we can worry about internal consistency in plan 9, but fact is, in the rest of the known universe, uparrow goes up a line, downarrow goes down, they move the cursor. We've got page up and page down; we could always use them. It was bad enough when right arrow and left arrow did what they did .... If we're halfway to readline, well, then, maybe people want it, and we should have it, and not having it was a mistake all along. You should be different if it makes sense; otherwise, don't. But the worst thing we can do is fall into the 'it's always worked this way' mantra. At that point, you might as well be a Fortran programmer. ron