Re: can ups be operated from the keyboard?

From: Russell Browne (russ_at_amc.com)
Date: Fri Oct 12 2001 - 00:48:08 BST

  • Next message: Callum Gibson: "Re: can ups be operated from the keyboard?"
    Of the various proposals floated, a variation on the typing
    line shortcuts, (%s, %n, etc.) seems most easy to implement.
    
    I don't like using the function keys (F1, ...) or the keypad numbers
    because they have no mnemonic value. If it were configurable
    by X resources or the like, fine.  People can configure in any
    way that works for them, but I'd rather the out of the box tool
    had a fairly intuitive interface.
    
    The Function keys are already used as an alternative to the custom
    edit menu controled by the UPS_F*_STR environment variables, so
    that if one has access through some sequence of key strokes you
    can configure UPS to get the same feature through an Fx key.
    
    As to the typing line shortcuts, I suggest using some initial character
    other than '%', to avoid conflict with the existing %d and to
    provide greater flexibility in extending the % short cuts.
    
    I'm thinking of using '!', which has some mnemonic value as meaning
    "escape", and doesn't conflict with anything (I think); with the following
    rules:
    
       !s    step
       !n    next
       !r    run
       !u    up
       !d    down
       !c    continue
       !h    print these options to the output window
    	 Also for any other unrecognized commands
    
       All the !commands just look at the last character of the input string,
       and all stuff the typing line to contain just the first and last
       characters.  Thus, if you type
    
           !n<RET>
       
       it does a next, and repeats the next every time you type <RET>.
       Then if you type s<RET>, so that the typing line reads
    
           !ns
    
       it does a step and edits the typing line to read
       
           !s
    
       It would be desirable if the !commands removed the input from the
       edit history, so that the history buffer doesn't fill up with
       ! commands with more usefull stuff falling off the end.
    
      
    Does this sound desirable, of just wierd?
    
    Russ Browne
    Applied MicroSystems
    


    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Wed Feb 13 2002 - 21:58:18 GMT