From: Flemming Madsen (fma_at_ccieurope.com)
Date: Thu Oct 11 2001 - 12:35:39 BST
"Terry R. Friedrichsen" wrote: > > > my one irrational huge objection is the need to push any sort of meta key, > > gotta be the straight key! > > Somewhat reluctantly, I'd have to agree with this. Using control characters > isn't too bad an alternative, but I would still prefer the single keystroke, > while recognizing that one cannot always have everything ... > I agree here too > One thing that hasn't been suggested is to use the keypad keys, a la the way > some text editors work. > > So the keypad "0" key could be NEXT, for example, and the other keypad keys > would perform other designated functions. This way too strange in my opinion. Someone mentione an idea about letting different parts of ups have input focus. Ie. 1) the input field (of course) for how it works now, 2) the button panel for stuff like (s)tep (n)ext etc. captions should have the mnemomnic shortcut char underlined 3) other panels as well. how about e(x)pand (c)ollapes for data structures etc. the buttons at the top of the panel have mnemonics underlined. 4) code panel: (b)reak toggle, (i)nsert mode, <PgUP>/<PgDN> (Yes!), (j)ump to func, (b)ack etc ... The focus should be settable with the mouse and/or the tab key. Ideally it should be possible to operate ups without touching the mouse at all ! I should be glad to contribute to this, but do only have time for it during holidays. -- Regards /Flemming
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Wed Feb 13 2002 - 21:58:01 GMT