Re: screen alternatives on NT

Edward Peschko wrote:

> I was wondering what options NT users might have for 'screen'. In
> particular, I wanted an application that multiplexed terminals on the
> NT side (via cmd) was able to edit the buffers they produced, and was
> able to launch NT applications...
> 
> Anyways, I've cross-posted this to the xemacs-nt and xemacs-devel
> mailing lists, because I think that xemacs might be an acceptable
> substitute (assuming a screen NT port doesn't exist), and had a couple
> of questions for them:
> 
> 	1) does a 'screen' keybinding for xemacs exist?

Not that I know of.

> 	2) if not, what are some good pointers on creating one?

For shell-mode:

	(define-key shell-mode-map ...)

For term-mode:

	(define-key term-mode-map ...)

Or create a new keymap:

	(defvar screen-mode-map (make-sparse-keymap 'screen-mode-map))
	(set-keymap-parents screen-mode-map (list shell-mode-map))
	(define-key screen-mode-map ...)

then use use-local-map to install that keymap for shell-mode buffers.

> In particular, I find that the screen keybindings are especially
> friendly to people who run quite a few shells:
> 
> 	1) 'C-a c' vs 'M-x shell' to create a shell 

	(define-key shell-mode-map [(control ?a) ?c] 'shell)

> 	2) 'C-a <sp>' vs ?? to cycle shells.

Quick answer:

	(define-key shell-mode-map [(control ?a) space] 'bury-buffer)

[This will do the right thing if all of your buffers are shells.]

Better answer:

	(define-key shell-mode-map [(control ?a) space] 'find-next-shell-buffer)

[find-next-shell-buffer doesn't exist; you would need to write it.]

-- 
Glynn Clements <[email protected]>