From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Date: Sun,  9 Oct 2005 02:53:39 -0700
From: yard-ape@telus.net
To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu
Subject: Re: [9fans] Sam Rewrite (Was: SAM snarf with X)
Message-ID: <4348e8a3.Z3VcQ6SVX949XbvL%yard-ape@telus.net>
User-Agent: nail 11.22 3/20/05
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Topicbox-Message-UUID: 97b6d01c-ead0-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025

Russ Cox wrote:

> The die hard sam users would disagree vehemently with you.
> The nice thing about sam is that it's one window, not many,
> making it comfortable to edit a 30-file project without getting
> caught up in managing windows.

Alright, but I'm not sure I get it.  Can you give an example?  I imagine Acme can boast a single, absolute UI policy only because it's a more general tool; sam(term) is just an editor, and so is always being used inside another UI setting---even if it's rio.  Rob apparently designed the behaviour for consistency with it's original setting, but woudn't it be simpler if it was determined automatically by its setting?  From "The Text Editor Sam":

	"...the most obvious [problem] is that it is poorly integrated
	into the surrounding window system. By design, the user interface
	in sam feels almost identical to that of mux, but a thick wall
	separates text in sam from the programs running in mux."

>>    3) Mouse is (gasp!) configurable...
> 
> If you want xemacs, you know where to find it.

Ouch!

> I'm not sure I want to know what this really means, but
> "simple Athena/XTerm" sure sounds like an oxymoron to me.

Granted.  *Old* Athena/XTerm, then: set dot with button one click, scroll, extend dot with button three click.

>> uh, i really don't think that you need to be this radical. i've got
>> some code that allows 9term to scroll-select. they're based on
>> basically the same "struct Text", so i think it's doable.

Thanks, I'll check that out.

>>    6) Redo!
> 
> This is already implemented.

Ah!---Seems my $MANPATH has been pointing to an obsolete sam.1!  This is a very nice surprise.

(Not sure who posted this bit):

> i would like to unshare the buffer; but i'm not intersted
> in offending. perhaps this could be switched either via
> command line or menu option.

I've thought the command line switch would be nice, too.

Thanks again,

Derek