Dear All, It would be nice to have a keystroke to jump directly to any desired thread. Right now one has to do several page up''s or down''s to select a thread. Also while one is reading a message, it would be convenient to have a key stroke that allows one to read the next thread in the list. I guess I am supposed to do this using ''n'' key stroke. However this appears to be associated with search functionality. saji
Excerpts from Saji N Hameed''s message of Tue Dec 11 23:30:46 -0800 2007:> It would be nice to have a keystroke to jump directly to any desired > thread. Right now one has to do several page up''s or down''s to select > a thread.This shouldn''t be too hard. Anyone else want this?> Also while one is reading a message, it would be convenient to have a > key stroke that allows one to read the next thread in the list. I > guess I am supposed to do this using ''n'' key stroke. However this > appears to be associated with search functionality.",n" should now work. -- William <wmorgan-sup at masanjin.net>
On 30.12.2007, William Morgan wrote:> Excerpts from Saji N Hameed''s message of Tue Dec 11 23:30:46 -0800 2007: > > It would be nice to have a keystroke to jump directly to any desired > > thread. Right now one has to do several page up''s or down''s to select > > a thread. > > This shouldn''t be too hard. Anyone else want this?.. if it was mapped to :<n> or something it might be nice and vi like :) Cant see myself using it without also having an option to number the threads, by the time you''ve counted to the one you want you might as well have pressed down/up a few times. Equally if you''re having to press up/down too many times then a search to restrict the threads to the set you''re interested is usually better. Marcus
Excerpts from Marcus Williams''s message of Mon Dec 31 15:34:27 +0100 2007:> On 30.12.2007, William Morgan wrote: > > Excerpts from Saji N Hameed''s message of Tue Dec 11 23:30:46 -0800 2007: > > > It would be nice to have a keystroke to jump directly to any desired > > > thread. Right now one has to do several page up''s or down''s to select > > > a thread. > > > > This shouldn''t be too hard. Anyone else want this? > > .. if it was mapped to :<n> or something it might be nice and vi like > :)+1 for :<command> -- Nicolas Pouillard aka Ertai