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#12380: other window related commands broken Date: Sun, 09 Sep 2012 12:05:50 +0200 Message-ID: <504C69FE.7000208@gmx.at> References: <504A43D2.1010307@sprynet.com> <504A5866.9010009@gmx.at> <504A724B.3020202@sprynet.com> <504AFF67.7070600@gmx.at> <504BF230.1000805@sprynet.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1347185201 10038 80.91.229.3 (9 Sep 2012 10:06:41 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 9 Sep 2012 10:06:41 +0000 (UTC) Cc: 12380@debbugs.gnu.org To: Doug Morgan Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sun Sep 09 12:06:43 2012 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1TAePZ-0005Kc-AT for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Sun, 09 Sep 2012 12:06:41 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:40736 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1TAePV-0007xG-TI for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Sun, 09 Sep 2012 06:06:37 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:38695) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1TAePT-0007x7-Jq for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 09 Sep 2012 06:06:37 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1TAePS-0003bL-LH for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 09 Sep 2012 06:06:35 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.43]:40086) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1TAePS-0003bH-Ho for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 09 Sep 2012 06:06:34 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1TAePu-00087P-Np for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 09 Sep 2012 06:07:02 -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: Sun, 09 Sep 2012 10:07:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 12380 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: X-Debbugs-Original-Cc: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org, 12380@debbugs.gnu.org Original-Received: via spool by 12380-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B12380.134718516331112 (code B ref 12380); Sun, 09 Sep 2012 10:07:02 +0000 Original-Received: (at 12380) by debbugs.gnu.org; 9 Sep 2012 10:06:03 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:49627 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1TAeOw-00085l-VA for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 09 Sep 2012 06:06:03 -0400 Original-Received: from mailout-de.gmx.net ([213.165.64.23]:50518) by debbugs.gnu.org with smtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1TAeOv-00085N-4q for 12380@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 09 Sep 2012 06:06:02 -0400 Original-Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 09 Sep 2012 10:05:31 -0000 Original-Received: from 62-47-60-139.adsl.highway.telekom.at (EHLO [62.47.60.139]) [62.47.60.139] by mail.gmx.net (mp037) with SMTP; 09 Sep 2012 12:05:31 +0200 X-Authenticated: #14592706 X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX1+Sgg55Bp+Swg2rhqOFES11gmlulOX4odls31c9sL /uKkRYa4pOPbSp In-Reply-To: <504BF230.1000805@sprynet.com> X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0 X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 Precedence: list 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:64001 Archived-At: > First, here is what the debugger says when I try to "Send Bug Report:..." > Debugger entered--Lisp error: (wrong-type-argument stringp nil) > file-name-directory(nil) > byte-code("\300\301\302\303\304!!\"\305BC\207" [format "hides > \\(%s.*\\)" file-name-directory locate-library "simple.el" (1 > font-lock-warning-face)] 5) I don't understand why it doesn't find this. Does evaluating (locate-library "simple.el") always fail on your system? If so, what is your value of the variable `load-path'? > I did exactly flip my usage of vertical and > horizontal splitting from the emacs usage of the term. I should have > said "One of the windows **splits horizontally**(!!) ". The terms vertically/horizontally have caused lots of confusion in the past and meanwhile should have been elided from all references to window splitting. > In any case the > bad split is into two side-by-side windows. The to-my-taste poor > splitting happens when (window-total-width) >= 164. I see. > The problem is fixed by setting split-width-threshold to 500. nil should be more intuitive. > I did try setting it to nil as the variable's documentation > suggests and the customization dialog told me the value of the variable > needed to be an integer. Don't know if it accepted nil anyway or > rejected it or what, but 500 sure works. Thanks again. In the dialog you are not allowed to insert nil in the field reserved for numbers. You should use the "Value Menu" button and select "nil" from the choices presented there. Please try again. > I do think split-width-threshold should default to never splitting > horizontally (I've got the right word this time), but that's just > decades of never have wide windows automatically split horizontally > talking. Maybe it will seem perfectly natural to someone not shocked to > see it. IIRC we made it an integer (albeit a large one) to make people notice that they can use it. I can't judge whether that was a good idea. > On second thought, I wouldn't so much mind emacs splitting a window > horizontally when I just have one window visible at the time. That > might actually be nice. However, when I already have my screen split in > two, but vertically, I think it's a bad idea without redeeming qualities > to split one of the windows horizontally instead of just jumping to the > "other" already open window. But that's why `split-width-threshold' is customizable. More experienced users can write their own `split-window-sensibly' substitutes which gives them lots of additional possibilites. > So, I'm changing my bug report to say that emacs should never > automatically introduce any new split for M-x M-b (and similar commands) > when it already has two or more open windows (regardless of how they are > arranged). The problem is just a bit deeper than simply changing the > value of split-width-threshold. Maybe someone has a good idea on how to improve this. martin