Re: position on changing defaults?

[Xavier Maillard]

   2008/3/7, Richard Stallman <address@hidden>:

   > I have never tried iswitchb.  What incompatible changes would I notice
   >  if this change were made?

   You will be able to chose the buffer you want to go to in a
   find-as-you-type way. I find the benefit of it real, because :
    - there is no need to hit the * to go to *Message*
    - there is no need to hit S-M for the capital M in *Message*
    - you might want to go to a buffer that you can not remember
   precisely how its name begins, but know a slice of its name : enter
   the slice until you see the correct name appear

   Basically, it makes one need buffer-list less often, therefore
   "increase productivity".
   But as Stefan said, all that is a matter of improving the completion
   mechanism of switch-to-buffer.

   What will maybe annoy you using it is how to choose, in the list of
   buffers matching your entry, the one you really want. In a purely
   incremental search like in switch-to-buffer, there is no need of such
   a mechanism because names are completed up to ambiguity, and
   desambiguity is made be entering a few more caracters. In iswichb, if
   you have opened buffers "first-foobar" and "second-foobar" and you
   enter "foobar", there is ambiguity. Iswitchb provides C-s and C-r to
   move forward and backward in the list of matching buffers. I personaly
   find this last design choice counter-intuitive, and I think it could
   be improved. But all the rest is very valuable.

Well sumed up Paul. Why not put this as an entry into the manual
as a first "shoot" ? I am speaking about the first paragraph and
the part on C-r and C-s.

Regards,

        Xavier
-- 
http://www.gnu.org
http://www.april.org
http://www.lolica.org