1. Forum
  2. Usenet
  3. COMP.OS.LINUX.X

  • Whatever happened to the Secondary Selection?

    From Charles Lindsey@21:1/5 to All on Sat Aug 20 21:01:33 2016
    XPost: comp.windows.x

    For over 20 years, I have been using the secondary-selection (a standard feature of the X-Windows system) when editing texts, using the Solaris operating system on Sun Hardware. Recently, I have switched to Linux on
    i86 hardware, and have been horrified to find that this valuable feature
    is not supported by modern toolkits and editors. The world seems to have forgotten what it was meant for, and yet I believe it is the best thing
    since sliced bread.

    This is not the place to explain what the secondary-selection does, and
    why it should be used more widely. To see that, I invite you to visit my website at
    http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/~chl/secondary-selection.html
    which I hope will persuade you that something needs to be done about it.

    However, the purpose of this message is to introduce my Experimental
    Extension to GTK-3 so that you guys can try it out for yourselves and to
    see how useful it can be for constructing texts (and particularly program texts, where there is a common requirement to grab existing bits of code
    - perhaps even just identifiers - from other places, whether in the same document or from outside).

    My implementation is based on gtk+-3.10.8, because I am using Ubuntu
    14.04LTS "Trusty Tahr", though it may well work on other Linux versions.
    Yes I know 3.10.8 is ancient, but I don't expect my code, which is pretty hairy, to be fit for immediate incorporation in current versions of gtk.
    But it now works well enough for it to be tested more widely, and if you
    and other people like it, then I would be happy to join the GTK Developer
    Team and to do the job properly.

    So please look at my website, download my code, give it a try and report
    your experiences here. (Note, followups set to comp.os.linux.x).

    --
    Charles H. Lindsey ---------At Home, doing my own thing ------------------
    Tel: +44 161 436 6131 Web: http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/~chl Email: [email protected] Snail: 5 SK8 3JU, U.K.
    PGP: 2C15F1A9 Fingerprint: 73 6D C2 51 93 A0 01 E7 65 E8 64 7E 14 A4 AB A5

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From dlbendigo@21:1/5 to Charles Lindsey on Sat Sep 17 18:10:31 2016
    XPost: comp.windows.x

    Charles Lindsey <[email protected]> Wrote in message:
    For over 20 years, I have been using the secondary-selection (a standard feature of the X-Windows system) when editing texts, using the Solaris operating system on Sun Hardware. Recently, I have switched to Linux on
    i86 hardware.

    It seems that you are the only one to think it has value. There
    are two
    buffers already How many do you need?
    --

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Lew Pitcher@21:1/5 to [email protected] on Sat Sep 17 10:40:45 2016
    XPost: comp.windows.x

    On Saturday September 17 2016 04:10, in comp.os.linux.x, "dlbendigo" <[email protected]> wrote:

    Charles Lindsey <[email protected]> Wrote in message:
    For over 20 years, I have been using the secondary-selection (a standard
    feature of the X-Windows system) when editing texts, using the Solaris
    operating system on Sun Hardware. Recently, I have switched to Linux on
    i86 hardware.

    It seems that you are the only one to think it has value.

    No, Charles is /not/ the only one to think that secondary-selection has value.

    And, who are /you/ to say that secondary-selection has no value?



    --
    Lew Pitcher
    "In Skills, We Trust"
    PGP public key available upon request

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Kenny McCormack@21:1/5 to [email protected] on Sun Sep 18 11:14:43 2016
    XPost: comp.windows.x

    In article <nrjkl7$slm$[email protected]>,
    Lew Pitcher <[email protected]> wrote:
    On Saturday September 17 2016 04:10, in comp.os.linux.x, "dlbendigo" ><[email protected]> wrote:

    Charles Lindsey <[email protected]> Wrote in message:
    For over 20 years, I have been using the secondary-selection (a standard >>> feature of the X-Windows system) when editing texts, using the Solaris
    operating system on Sun Hardware. Recently, I have switched to Linux on
    i86 hardware.

    It seems that you are the only one to think it has value.

    No, Charles is /not/ the only one to think that secondary-selection has value.

    So there are two of you?

    And, who are /you/ to say that secondary-selection has no value?

    Where did he say that?

    --
    (Cruz certainly has an odd face) ... it looks like someone sewed pieces of a waterlogged Reagan mask together at gunpoint ...

    http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/how-america-made-donald-trump-unstoppable-20160224

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Charles Lindsey@21:1/5 to Lew Pitcher on Tue Sep 27 20:11:49 2016
    On Sat, 17 Sep 2016 10:40:45 -0400, Lew Pitcher wrote:

    On Saturday September 17 2016 04:10, in comp.os.linux.x, "dlbendigo" <[email protected]> wrote:

    Charles Lindsey <[email protected]> Wrote in message:
    For over 20 years, I have been using the secondary-selection (a
    standard feature of the X-Windows system) when editing texts, using
    the Solaris operating system on Sun Hardware. Recently, I have
    switched to Linux on i86 hardware.

    It seems that you are the only one to think it has value.

    No, Charles is /not/ the only one to think that secondary-selection has value.

    Well I'm glad to hear that, but I wish those others would speak up. My implementation has been downloaded 11 times now, but I have heard no
    feedback from anyone who has tried to use it. The only proof of the
    pudding is in the eating, so will someone please try it and report here
    that they do (or do not) like it.

    So far, we just have people saying "nobody ever uses it, so it must be useless", which is a non-sequitur.


    --
    Charles H. Lindsey ---------At Home, doing my own thing ------------------
    Tel: +44 161 436 6131 Web: http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/~chl Email: [email protected] Snail: 5 SK8 3JU, U.K.
    PGP: 2C15F1A9 Fingerprint: 73 6D C2 51 93 A0 01 E7 65 E8 64 7E 14 A4 AB A5

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)