Sam Steingold <sds(a)goems.com> writes:
> >> They are identical because all of the warnings you get are being
> >> shown. *Warnings* buffer is an internal buffer with all the
> >> warnings. If you set `display-warning-minimum-level' to
> >> something like `emergency', the -show buffer will disappear, and
> >> the *Warnings* buffer will continue existing in the background.
>
> then the `*Warnings*' buffer should be ` *Warnings*', right?
Right. Will fix.
> >> > sure - but why two parallel facilities?
> >>
> >> Because there are people who still prefer doing things "the old
> >> way" (not to mention that `M-x apropos' is faster than the hyper
> >> version), and who would (rightfully) bitch and moan if we were
> >> to remove the old facility. We've been bitten by such things in
> >> the past, and it's best to have a conservative approach.
>
> getting 2 parallel facilities depending on the keystroke used to
> invoke help is very confusing for new users.
I thought `C-h a' invoked hyper-stuff, and you had to use `M-x
apropos' to get the old one. Isn't that the case?
> all help/apropos in Emacs is hypertext now, it is "backwards
> compatible" in the sense that the buffers look just like they did in
> e19, but some places are mouse-clickable, and I see no slowdown
> (well, no slowdown which could not be blamed on MULE :-). I am not
> trying to tell you that Emacs is better than XEmacs, just that IMO
> this particular feature is implemented there better.
I haven't seen what FSF Emacs does with the help buffers. Last time I
checked, `M-x apropos' was quite clickable in XEmacs.
--
Hrvoje Niksic <hniksic(a)srce.hr> | Student at FER Zagreb, Croatia
--------------------------------+--------------------------------
ED WILL NOT CORRUPT YOUR PRECIOUS BODILY FLUIDS!!
