Re: Bidirectional links with eev

[Eduardo Ochs]

On Sun, 25 Sept 2022 at 19:15, Quiliro Ordóñez <quiliro@riseup.net> wrote:
> (...)

Hi Quiliro!

First:

> I cannot update to 20220924.  Are you sure it is in ELPA yet?

Ouch! It is not! I'll try to debug that...

> I do not use Python because I think it is a language which is just a fad
> which will die.  But I think that there are many people that could be
> attracted to eev because it has useful Python hacks.

I use Python very little, and I don't like it. But I think that adding
more Python support to eev will attract good karma...

> For both talks, I suggest to open with a 2 sentence description of what
> eev is. And then an explanation of the results which are expected from
> using the tool you are about to present.  These introductions should be
> understood by anyone, regardless of the experience they have with Emacs
> or eev.

The problem is that even after all these years I still don't have a
good short description of what eev is _that makes sense to most
people_, and I am still trying to understand why some ideas that are
totally obvious to me are so hard for other people...

Here's one example. A few weeks ago I posted this here:

  https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/eev/2022-09/msg00000.html

The discussion on Reddit had a few more comments from both the OP and
me. Here is my last comment there (so far):

  You have some good points. I think that I need to stress in the docs
  that the workflow that I described is only worth the pain when we
  really, really, REALLY want to keep "executable notes" of how to
  obtain a certain window configuration... I prefer this

    (defun q2 () (interactive)
      (find-3a '(find-fline "~/2022.2-quadros/")
               '(find-fline "~/2022.2-C2/Makefile")
               '(find-fline "~/2022.2-C3/Makefile")))

  to a macro because it is easier to read, easier to edit, and easier
  to adapt to other tasks than a macro. I have a bunch of things like
  this

    (setq last-kbd-macro (kbd "M-h M-2 (find-fline SPC \" 2<delete>
    M-z : C-y <left> \" <delete> SPC\n M-z : C-y DEL SPC \" <delete>
    M-z = C-y 3<left> C-k \") C-a <down> RET"))

  saved in my notes, but usually they become hard to read very
  quickly... while the function q2 above is something that I know that
  I will have to execute hundreds of times in 2022.2 (an academic
  semester) with M-x q2, and that when 2022.2 ends and 2023.1 start I
  will just have to modify it a bit... but most people would prefer to
  do that by using something like ace-window than by writing small
  programs in Lisp.

Most people don't understand why I prefer to keep "executable notes of
everything that I do" in a format that I find easy to read, to edit,
and to reuse, even when that takes much longer than just installing a
package and learning a few new keybindings... maybe their notion of
"fun" is opposite to mine. =S

> I do think that key bindings for eev should all share the same prefix
> keybinding.  It would make it easier to identify it.  Maybe another idea
> would be to use C-c as is used in org-mode.  I am not sure about the way
> to solve it, but I have difficulty remembering how to do things in eev.
> Maybe you have better ideas.

Here's how I've handled that since the 90s - in a slightly modernized
version. Suppose that your cheat sheet about things that your are
currently learning is in a file called ~/LEARNING. Then run this,

  (defun le () (interactive) (find-fline "~/LEARNING"))
  (defun ll () (interactive) (find-2a nil '(le)))
  (defun eejump-26 () (le))
  (defun eejump-27 () (ll))

and ta-da: now `M-x le' and `M-2 M-6 M-j' open ~/LEARNING in the
current window, and `M-x ll' and `M-2 M-7 M-j' open ~/LEARNING in the
window at the right.

Does that make sense? Does it look convenient? Or clumsy?

  Cheers - and more news about kla soon...
    [[]], E.