On Thu, Nov 06, 2003 at 05:44:54AM -0500, David T-G wrote: > % Hmm ... that's interesting ... I guess that's more efficient from within > % a macro, but from the keyboard hh (HH in my config) seems so much easier > % than <-,-> (or hl in my config). > > That would call them twice, since you'd be displaying the previous > message (and what's with the arrow keys? real men don't even MENTION > arrow keys! ;-) I prefier i<enter> to jump back to the index and then > into the message again if I really need to redisplay. I didn't know off-hand the default keybindings involved, and I wouldn't be surprised if many others don't know them intuitively at first. (I, after all, had been using those keybindings for years, until I left ELM. Most others here didn't even have that going for them.) No matter what keybinding you're using, though, toggling the header weeding twice will be a double keystroke (assuming you don't have macros rebinding stuff, of course), whereas going back to the index and then returning to the message probably won't be. A double keystroke is always quicker, given a fast enough computer. In our particular case, a Xeon 466 (two 450 CPUs (slightly OCed), but Mutt can only use one at a time) is fast enough so HH works faster than hl for me. I'm sure most of you have much faster systems. - Dave -- Uncle Cosmo, why do they call this a word processor? It's simple, Skyler. You've seen what food processors do to food, right? Please visit this link: http://rotter.net/israel
Attachment:
pgplMUIvSW162.pgp
Description: PGP signature