On Sep 19, 9:39 am, Alan Mackenzie
wrote:> XahLee
xahlee.org> wrote:>> Hi Eli moron,
>> U wrote:
>>> If you want people to listen to your ideas seriously, you will wish to
>>> make a point of expressing them accurately.
>> Please understand, that the level of precision and time spend in
>> writing needed depends on the context. You would be a fool, to spend
>> one year to compose a newsgroup post. And, you would be moron if you
>> nickpick on spellings and phrasings that are not critical to the main
>> ideas.
>
> Sometimes,Xah, your spellings and phrasings, to say nothing of your
> wierd variable length quotes with dangling bits, make your message all
> but indecipherable.
> Eli has one up on you there. English isn't his native language either,
> yet he manages to convey his ideas with style and panache.
you think?
>> I'm not sure ur a moron, but i wondered, because in my previous
>> message i specifically pointed out that please focus on main ideas.
>> You seem to me don't have much general education to sufficiently
>> understand the situation, but gave a retort about precision that is
>> typical of sophomorons.
>
> OK, back to the main point. It seems that `switch-to-buffer' (C-x b)
> does pretty much what you want.
The question is not about whether it “pretty much” does. Nor is it
about whether what i want.
The issue, is about a problem with emacs's “*scratch*” buffer, and how
the 2 alternative practical existing ways to create empty buffer each
are unfit for the purpose. I detailed them in my article:
http://xahlee.org/emacs/modernization_scratch_buffer.html
Please u peruse of it.
> Except you seem upset that when you do
> M-x kill-buffer, Emacs kills the buffer. I'd be unhappy if it didn't.
The issue is not about whether i'm upset. Nor is it about whether kill-
buffer not killing the buffer.
Please think.
> Actually, you'd be better typing C-x k. All you want, I think, is that
> Emacs should give you a warning when you're about to kill such a buffer.
Huh? what r u talking about?
> Why don't you implement this and post it up? It's not rocket science,
> and you do have a basic grasp of Emacs Lisp. You seem to expect that
> somebody else should do the work of implementing your ideas - that's
> just not the way things work. Implement it now - it should take more
> than an hour or two to modify C-x b - then we can try it out to see how
> good it actually is.
>
>> Fuck you.
>
> Xah, don't try to fuck - you're not very good at it. Write some Elisp
> instead.
The issue is not about fucking.
Please focuse on the issue if u are interested in discussing it.
Xah
∑
http://xahlee.org/
☄
