From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: martin rudalics Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#9875: 24.0.90; Confusing description of the "window tree" in ELisp manual Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2011 15:16:40 +0200 Message-ID: <4EA959B8.4030402@gmx.at> References: <83zkgnbo50.fsf@gnu.org> <4EA92AC0.1040803@gmx.at> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1319721454 8362 80.91.229.12 (27 Oct 2011 13:17:34 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2011 13:17:34 +0000 (UTC) Cc: 9875@debbugs.gnu.org To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu Oct 27 15:17:30 2011 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([140.186.70.17]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1RJPpi-0008NX-PX for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Thu, 27 Oct 2011 15:17:22 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:34277 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RJPpi-0004Kk-9M for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Thu, 27 Oct 2011 09:17:22 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]:51146) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RJPpf-0004Kc-KD for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Thu, 27 Oct 2011 09:17:20 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RJPpa-0001i6-0r for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Thu, 27 Oct 2011 09:17:19 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.43]:49321) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RJPpZ-0001i0-Uq for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Thu, 27 Oct 2011 09:17:13 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1RJPrK-0007il-Ai for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Thu, 27 Oct 2011 09:19:02 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: martin rudalics Original-Sender: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2011 13:19:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 9875 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: Original-Received: via spool by 9875-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B9875.131972151729641 (code B ref 9875); Thu, 27 Oct 2011 13:19:02 +0000 Original-Received: (at 9875) by debbugs.gnu.org; 27 Oct 2011 13:18:37 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1RJPqv-0007i2-Jp for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 27 Oct 2011 09:18:37 -0400 Original-Received: from mailout-de.gmx.net ([213.165.64.22]) by debbugs.gnu.org with smtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1RJPqt-0007ho-Li for 9875@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 27 Oct 2011 09:18:36 -0400 Original-Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 27 Oct 2011 13:16:41 -0000 Original-Received: from 62-47-54-146.adsl.highway.telekom.at (EHLO [62.47.54.146]) [62.47.54.146] by mail.gmx.net (mp018) with SMTP; 27 Oct 2011 15:16:41 +0200 X-Authenticated: #14592706 X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX1/5dXFYrHP58Y85y9xM2Ibae9h1ElWLP3SzgSDF1x /hzkfmmOWtOR4M User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.21 (Windows/20090302) In-Reply-To: X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0 X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.11 Precedence: list Resent-Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2011 09:19:02 -0400 X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 2) X-Received-From: 140.186.70.43 X-BeenThere: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org List-Id: "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.bugs:53207 Archived-At: > It's clear that representing the non-leaf nodes as window objects was > chosen because it's convenient from the implementation POV. But that > doesn't mean we need to expose this to every place where we describe > how windows are split and resized. True. But the Elisp manual is about reading and writing Elisp code. And the necessary distinction in descriptions is in just one word - "any" or "live". >> This is usually said in the second sentence of the doc-string. For >> `split-window' it reads >> >> "WINDOW can be any window and defaults to the selected one." > > When J.R. Hacker reads about "any window", she will definitely have > only live windows in mind. And what would be so bad about that? A lost opportunity. When Joe grows up he will read the text more carefully and maybe even appreciate what he finds there. >> And for `set-window-buffer' we have >> >> "WINDOW has to be a live window and defaults to the selected one." > > Which immediately begs the question "how can a window not be `live'"? And how could you live with a text like For practical purposes, a window exists only while it is displayed in a frame. Once removed from the frame, the window is effectively deleted and should not be used, _even though there may still be references to it_ from other Lisp objects; see *Note Deleting Windows::. Restoring a saved window configuration is the only way for a window no longer on the screen to come back to life; see *Note Window Configurations::. all those years? > Simple is in the eye of the beholder. > > And I was talking about the manual, not the doc strings, btw. Which have to be consistent, btw. martin