From: Anthony Sorace <a@9srv.net>
To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@9fans.net>
Subject: Re: [9fans] acme tag bars stacking
Date: Mon, 31 Oct 2016 21:23:29 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1E0C96FA-A0AD-4E2A-B167-9612C40D5B81@9srv.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAHcDtn=LfLezSEyORhSraL-YJJOcrWCU+haBggshCWe_cm3Utw@mail.gmail.com>
I’ve often wanted the same sorting change. I do, however, find yiyus’ rationale compelling. I’d be interested in playing with it, if you try it out.
> On Oct 30, 2016, at 11:16 , Mathieu Lonjaret <mathieu.lonjaret@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> yeah, good points.
>
> On 29 October 2016 at 00:47, yy <yiyu.jgl@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 28 October 2016 at 16:23, Mathieu Lonjaret
>> <mathieu.lonjaret@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Anyway, does anyone know what the rationale was for choosing to stack
>>> them at the bottom? Or why it would be a a bad idea to make them stack
>>> at the top instead?
>>
>> Let's suppose you have many windows in a column. When you work in one
>> of them, you B2 it and put it on the top of the stack. Then you work
>> on another one and it goes to the top, moving the previous one to the
>> second position, and so on. This way, your most recently used windows
>> are always on top, the least used ones go to the bottom of the stack.
>> I would find counterintuitive that the windows you used a longer time
>> ago stayed at the top, between your "working windows" and the column
>> and main tag lines.
>>
>> But I would guess the main reason it works this way is that it seemed
>> more natural to move a window to the head than to the tail of a linked
>> list, and it just worked well enough.
>>
>> I see how it may be more practical to stack them at the top when
>> working only with two or three windows, but it would be kind of weird
>> if you have ten. If you feel it will fit your workflow better, it is
>> probably not too difficult to get it done.
>>
>>
>> --
>> - yiyus || JGL .
>>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-11-01 1:23 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-10-28 14:23 Mathieu Lonjaret
2016-10-28 14:37 ` Mark van Atten
2016-10-28 14:48 ` James A. Robinson
2016-10-28 15:02 ` Mathieu Lonjaret
2016-10-28 22:47 ` yy
2016-10-30 15:16 ` Mathieu Lonjaret
2016-11-01 1:23 ` Anthony Sorace [this message]
2016-11-05 18:10 ` Mathieu Lonjaret
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1E0C96FA-A0AD-4E2A-B167-9612C40D5B81@9srv.net \
--to=a@9srv.net \
--cc=9fans@9fans.net \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).