key bindings again



Well,
  I had a nicely working system with 5.9.3.

Now, it is screwed up.

The home, end keys only work for a short time.

I don't see how to quickly delete several lines at a time, etc.

Of course, I can use a separate editor and "load, batch,etc." but
what's the point of xmaxima then?

I don't mind if the windows users don't seem to need this
functionality, but I really do object to the fact that the xmaxima on
linux is screwed up.

Aren't there other users out there who feel the same way?

I have been very inspired by the whole maxima idea.

In fact, largely because of the ease of editing, testing, etc, I have
found it superior in many ways to Mathematica (I haven'g used Maple yet).

Now, it seems that if I want to keep current, I'll have to deal with a
cumbersome interface.

Indeed, if it gets cumbersome to use, at least I will go to other
tools.

This was not intended as a rant (although it seems to have turned into
one).

How about someone telling me where the keybindings were stored in
5.9.2, and I'll try to use those bindings in all the future releases.

TIA,

-sen



On Wed, 16 Aug 2006, Robert Dodier wrote:

> On 8/15/06, sen1 at math.msu.edu <sen1 at math.msu.edu> wrote:
>
>> For what it's worth, the key bindings in the current 5.10 candidate in
>> xmaxima for windows are not the way they were in v. 5.9.2.
>
> The key bindings are largely the same. The only ones that have
> changed, to the best of my knowledge, are ctrl-p and ctrl-n.
> If you know differently, feel free to add that information to this thread.
> (FWIW it seems likely the change was unintentional.)
>
>> As I said in a previous message, the old ones were like "emacs."
>
> The key bindings were/are a mix of Emacs and Windows.
> We get about 10 times the downloads of the Maxima Windows
> installer as for the rpm's or tarball. I'm guessing very few Windows
> users know anything about Emacs, so I don't see any point to
> expanding the scope of Emacs bindings beyond what it is at present.
>
>> Why not keep them as in 5.9.2, or provide a mechanism by which the
>> user can redefine or load alternate key bindings?
>
> I'm not in favor of either suggestion here. Ctrl-p and ctrl-n aren't 
> documented,
> and the same functions are supplied by up arrow and down arrow
> or moving the cursor with the mouse. So I don't see a need to revert.
> As to making it possible to remap key bindings, that sounds like a lot
> of work which would benefit a very small number of users.
>
> Robert Dodier
>
> _______________________________________________
> Maxima mailing list
> Maxima at math.utexas.edu
> http://www.math.utexas.edu/mailman/listinfo/maxima
>

-- 
  ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
  | Sheldon E. Newhouse            |    e-mail: sen1 at math.msu.edu           |
  | Mathematics Department         |       				   |
  | Michigan State University      | telephone: 517-355-9684                |
  | E. Lansing, MI 48824-1027 USA  |       FAX: 517-432-1562                |
  ---------------------------------------------------------------------------