The default is 72, in my understanding, because of the historical use of email.
As folks successively quote each other in a thread, the prepending of '>' to the quoted text requires something narrower than 80, else it'll hit the 80-chars-wide limit and wrap.
72 would allow 4 or 8 quote-levels, depending on if your client decides to insert spaces around the '>'.
After the first 10 minutes of testing, imported my gmail account, wrote few test emails, I don't think this is really read for prime time. Also does not play well with my messing with my IMAP account via other clients. Is slower than gmail since for some reason the IMAP account is accessed to retrieve messages when I open a thread.
Btw to be able to write new emails with vim again is a joy... Still almost everything Sup is doing is in theory possible to do in a web-based or resident application with improved font rendering, simple icons to signal status of messages and so on.
Remember xchat? This IRC client had a lesson, it was possible to retain everything of good there was in text-only IRC clients, and add the good stuff of GUIs. The nerd email client I'm waiting for is something like this.
Fast: just scan IMAP for new messages but take everything local otherwise.
Great interface: mixed between curses but with improved rendering and config menus thanks to GUI toolkit or even web-based can be ok.
Easy to configure: unlike mutt for example. Spun is nice from this POV at least for the first steps.
Give me my editor: if resident, fire vim for me in some way, otherwise implement a decent editor with vim and emacs key bindings if it's web based.
It's worth to note that even a web-mail can be scriptable, using javascript.
As a stop-gap measure, you might find that one of the extensions or plugins that let's you edit text boxes in a browser using vim or emacs would help in using gmail.
Yes I used to have one of this extensions, don't remember the name but was capable of editing with Vim all the textarea elements in every web page. To switch between firefox and xterm was not very comfortable at least with my window manager. What I could like more is an extension that can give vim features to the browser text area.
Btw there is something strange going on here: the textarea is the most popular text editor out there, the most used one where millions of people write short and long text every day, and still browser developers are not realizing that it should be improved.
Funny, I was just referencing this issue the other day.
When people ask me what I do, I say "computer stuff", and occasionally I'll lift my hands and kind of type at a non-existent keyboard. They invariably go "oh" -- to date, not one has said "ok, but what KIND of computer stuff?" which would be my own personal response.
This tells me I'm either consistently gauging their level of computer savvy pretty accurately, or that occasionally I come off like a bit of a dick. YMMV.
You're not being a dick. It's generally correct to say something short (eg "I teach high school") and to go for brevity over correctness. If the person shows interest then you can launch into the details (and probably glaze their eyes).
Same here. 'Computer stuff' is simple and to the point, sometimes they'll ask for more details but usually not.
It's so hard for me to put a single label on myself because I do so many different things. I'm a freelance writer, SEO, programmer, marketer, PR-person and much, much more.
It doesn't work at all for me in Firefox 3 on Windows. I get the same response after clicking on all links (feed reader, HN frontpage, this page):
Page Load Error
Address Not Found
Firefox can't find the server at www.➡.ws.
This is the same trouble as with Unicode snowman domain.
In one discussion here on HN I figured out it's probably because of some security measure to prevent phishing. There are some Unicode characters that look like normal ASCII letters (for example in Cyrillic alphabet), so if Unicode worked in urls, you could create malicious sites that would look like real ones:
Microsoft Windows 5.1 (Build 2600.xpsp_sp3_gdr.080814-1236: Service Pack 3)
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US) AppleWebKit/525.19 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/1.0.154.48 Safari/525.19
Reading from the front page of Hacker News. The links work but all of the fancy pants unicode stuff shows up as square boxes. This was also a problem when http://unicodesnowmanforyou.com/ was making the rounds.
I'm almost certain it's just a font issue since the Unicode Snowman takes advantage of a font embedding feature specific to IE (and works properly there). I'm not sure anything can be done about this, short of pushing browsers to install fonts.
It's probably telling that I can't get the character to display properly in any interface... but whether of the practicality of the suggestion, or the level of my char-fu, I'm not sure.
Under Linux you can enable the compose key, with setxkbmap -option "compose:rwin"
This lets you prefix digraphs with rwin, and have them print unicode characters. This is (to some extent) configurable, although I am not sure on the location of the mapping.
Nope, just little blocks. Some interfaces display it as one solid dark monolith, some as empty squares, and a special few as festive little glyphs with mysterious markings inside. (XP SP2, every browser under the sun and then some.)
This website is pretty useful: www.copypastecharacter.com
Just click on the symbol you want, and it's put on your clipboard. They just updated it today to support the ♺ symbol.
