[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: display.texi: (<line>,<col>) isn't documented.
From: |
Juanma Barranquero |
Subject: |
Re: display.texi: (<line>,<col>) isn't documented. |
Date: |
Thu, 7 Jun 2007 17:35:56 +0200 |
On 6/7/07, Drew Adams <address@hidden> wrote:
How about:
column only - 67x
line only - 234y
line & column - 67x234y
Please, don't.
Advantages:
. Few characters (no wasted space).
More than 234:67
. It's clear which is horizontal and which is vertical.
Only if you know the (x,y) terminology (i.e.,
technically/scientifically oriented people).
. x and y are much more universal than L for "line"
and C for "column". No need to translate.
I'm not going to defend L and C, but Emacs buffers have rows (lines)
and columns, not x and y coordinates.
. Lowercase makes the units stand out from the digits.
The descender on the `y' makes it easy to spot and
disambiguate. (compared with L,C - and l,c suffers
from confusing l with 1)
My brain has no trouble parsing 234,67 or 234/67 or 234:67, but
67x234y is just a clump.
Disadvantages of other proposals:
. (34,67) and 34:67 are not clear about which is
horizontal and which is vertical.
No, but many files have much more lines than columns, and it's really
just a convention. Once you've used it for a while, it's automatic.
. :67 and 234: take longer to parse, to figure out
which is horizontal (vs 67x and 234y).
In some universe tangent to mine, surely :)
(BTW, very funny: with a Unicode font you could use U+2192 and U+2193
or some other suitable pointing-looking characters :)
. Using (234,67) for both horizontal and vertical, but 234L
and 67C for one only is more complex, less consistent.
Yes.
Juanma
- Re: mode line: 1) indicate region size, if active; 2) highlight column # if > limit, (continued)
- Re: display.texi: (<line>,<col>) isn't documented., David Kastrup, 2007/06/06
- Re: display.texi: (<line>,<col>) isn't documented., Stefan Monnier, 2007/06/06
- Re: display.texi: (<line>,<col>) isn't documented., Juanma Barranquero, 2007/06/06
- Re: display.texi: (<line>,<col>) isn't documented., Juri Linkov, 2007/06/06
- RE: display.texi: (<line>,<col>) isn't documented., Drew Adams, 2007/06/07
- Re: display.texi: (<line>,<col>) isn't documented., David House, 2007/06/07
- RE: display.texi: (<line>,<col>) isn't documented., Drew Adams, 2007/06/07
- Re: display.texi: (<line>,<col>) isn't documented., Lennart Borgman (gmail), 2007/06/07
- Re: display.texi: (<line>,<col>) isn't documented., David House, 2007/06/07
- Re: display.texi: (<line>,<col>) isn't documented.,
Juanma Barranquero <=
- Re: display.texi: (<line>,<col>) isn't documented., David House, 2007/06/07
- Re: display.texi: (<line>,<col>) isn't documented., Thomas Hühn, 2007/06/07
- Re: display.texi: (<line>,<col>) isn't documented., Andreas Schwab, 2007/06/07
- Re: display.texi: (<line>,<col>) isn't documented., Dieter Wilhelm, 2007/06/07
- RE: display.texi: (<line>,<col>) isn't documented., Drew Adams, 2007/06/07
- Re: display.texi: (<line>,<col>) isn't documented., Thomas Hühn, 2007/06/07
- Re: display.texi: (<line>,<col>) isn't documented., Juanma Barranquero, 2007/06/07
- Re: display.texi: (<line>,<col>) isn't documented., Jay Belanger, 2007/06/07
- Re: display.texi: (<line>,<col>) isn't documented., Juri Linkov, 2007/06/07
- Re: display.texi: (<line>,<col>) isn't documented., Dieter Wilhelm, 2007/06/07