Subject: tab go to end if no new messages?

From: [email-masked]
Date: Thu, 2 Dec 1999 13:40:50 -0800 (PST)

Ok, I amit this is complete laziness, but it seems to me that if 
there are no new messages, TAB should just (optionally?) go to the 
end of the message list.

As a person who has 1123 messages in one of my mailboxes and 867 in another,
hitting tab is more convenient than paging through a gazillion pages (out
of habit, I usually end up hitting space a bunch of times before realizing
I'm TENS of pages away from the end), or typing in the message #.

Speaking of paging, why does it take a long time sometimes?  Especially when
going back a page.

--
[email-masked]

-- 
-----------------------------------------------------------------
 For information about this mailing list, and its archives, see: 
 http://www.washington.edu/pine/pine-info/
-----------------------------------------------------------------

---

From: Mike Miller <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 2 Dec 1999 16:09:43 -0600 (CST)

> there are no new messages, TAB should just (optionally?) go to the 

Sounds good.

> As a person who has 1123 messages in one of my mailboxes and 867 in
> another, hitting tab is more convenient than paging through a
> gazillion pages (out of habit, I usually end up hitting space a bunch
> of times before realizing I'm TENS of pages away from the end), or
> typing in the message #.

Do you know about Ctrl-W Ctrl-V ?  That pattern of keystrokes will jump to
the end.  (Hit Ctrl-W and look at the options, some are relatively new.)

> Speaking of paging, why does it take a long time sometimes?  Especially when

Slow computer, not enough RAM, huge attachments in messages, I don't know!
:-)

Regards,

Mike

-- 
Michael B. Miller
University of Missouri--Columbia
http://taxa.psyc.missouri.edu/~mbmiller/