Path: csiph.com!weretis.net!feeder8.news.weretis.net!eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: bart again (UCX64)
Date: Tue, 05 Sep 2023 21:40:10 -0700
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 67
Message-ID: <86sf7roqxh.fsf@linuxsc.com>
References: <b74c088d-09e6-4842-8b6c-1921d68154c7n@googlegroups.com> <ucq86h$3auvq$1@dont-email.me> <ucqj27$3con1$1@dont-email.me> <ucqpgp$3dnop$1@dont-email.me> <aa8IM.249421$f7Ub.27491@fx47.iad> <ucr3kb$3f58o$1@dont-email.me> <ucs9pb$3nd9i$1@dont-email.me> <ucsg9u$3ofr6$1@dont-email.me> <ucsk81$3p2kg$1@dont-email.me> <ucsm1u$3pb1c$1@dont-email.me> <871qfiknil.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <ucsu3s$3qfrk$1@dont-email.me> <87v8ctkbsj.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <uctaf3$3v98j$1@dont-email.me> <87pm31jusi.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <2711a385-0bd0-4d0b-8f9a-1cdcf8682586n@googlegroups.com> <878r9ojjls.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <f1a10620-2d2a-4b10-b570-c05adca2d17en@googlegroups.com> <87r0nfwa8d.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <861qffqcxw.fsf@linuxsc.com> <871qfewy2m.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="f6301c9a6ce7286ea3bcf92b0a94924d"; logging-data="2493399"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/QKbCDTOE21tOk+GtT29H7D9EAmuhgElU="
User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.4 (gnu/linux)
Cancel-Lock: sha1:N0Mx0wwafqlCuPZADzHtByJLr6Y= sha1:EaBgRyVhuZkqstYy3ww+aTLo2Zc=
Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.c:174108

Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> writes:

> Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> writes:
>
>> Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> writes:
>>
>>> Ergonomics experts often design interfaces that I find hard to
>>> use.  To take one example, I want to use common key binding across
>>> applications, but the experts seem to think there is only one such
>>> set (and it comes from an OS I have not used for years), so I
>>> can't use the bindings my fingers "know" about.
>>
>> I'm curious to know more about the specifics here.  What key
>> bindings, which "one set to rule them all", what domain of
>> applications followed that set?
>
> I like to use Emacs keybindings.  I can use them in bash and programs
> that use GNU readline which includes a lot of REPL programs like ghci,
> swipl, gp and so on.  I can't use them in the Gnome browser.

Clearly emacs needs to add  M-x new-browser-frame  .

By the way, have you tried the Brave browser?  I haven't
yet but am thinking about it.  (The question here is
mostly rhetorical, feel free to duck it unless you really
want to answer.)

> One big annoyance is not strictly to do with keys but is UI-related.  I
> am used to having selected text available for immediate pasting with the
> middle button, but several applications have started to auto select text
> in certain situations and I loose my selection.

Clearly a need for selection rings so  ESC <middle button>  would
paste the second most recent selection, etc.

More seriously, one-level-deep "clipboards" really bug me.  I
know one is a lot lot better than zero, but even just two or
three would be a lot better than one.  (And don't get me started
on so-called "browser history".)

>> Also I'm curious to know how
>> you know (or why you suspect) the choices were made by experts?
>
> I don't.  Maybe I should have put "experts" it scare quotes.  I stated
> to notice the loss of configuration when Gnome got a team in to clean up
> the interface and develop a set of rules to simplify things for the
> average user.  They may not have been experts, but the announcement
> suggested they were.

I see.  I've been trying different u/li/nux windowing systems
recently, haven't found one yet that I really like (or at
least can stand).  I got a suggestion to try xfce, which I
expect to do someday.

>> What abilities or skills qualify them as experts?
>
> Too big a topic.  I hope you won't mind if I just don't even try to
> answer that.

Don't mind at all.

Probably I should mention that I am used to associating the word
ergonomics with (mostly) physical attributes, and not so much
with logical attributes like key bindings.  Maybe the word has
expanded its scope since I first learned it.

That said, your answers here have been quite illuminating.