Re: info-find-source

[Emanuel Berg]

Drew Adams wrote:

>> Another example where info is slower is this
>> very common situation. 1. You look something
>> up with info and use it. 2. You look
>> something else up and use that. 3, or I mean
>> 1b - because the first thing didn't quite
>> work! Now, with info, you have to navigate
>> back to that node to see what it really
>> said. And maybe between steps 1 and 2, you
>> looked up something else still, which you
>> didn't use, which might even belong to some
>> different program, etc. etc.!
>
> `M-n' (`clone-buffer') is your friend.

I'm aware of `clone-buffer'. But actually it
was you who once told me about it so I can give
you the credit anyway.

However all these examples only emphasize my
argument! I know that you can do a lot of stuff
with the info browser. But with a text file,
you either don't have to do it, *or* you can do
it, only not with whatever unknown interface
the Info browser provides, but with what you
use every day to edit, search, and view text
and code, i.e. stuff that you are already
embarrassingly familiar with!

So let's put it another way, what *advantages*
are there to the info browser? N.B. here we are
only talking about the browser, not the style
or organization of the info documentation
itself, which, as is evident by this
discussion, thru its uniformity can be accessed
in many different ways.

-- 
underground experts united
http://user.it.uu.se/~embe8573