From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#34749: 26.1; `delete-windows-on': (1) doc, (2) bug, (3) bug, (4) candidates Date: Fri, 08 Mar 2019 15:15:01 +0200 Message-ID: <83lg1pa4oa.fsf@gnu.org> References: <5C7E4BAB.3050508@gmx.at> <83mum5accd.fsf@gnu.org> <5C824BAC.4090907@gmx.at> Injection-Info: blaine.gmane.org; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:195.159.176.226"; logging-data="111349"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@blaine.gmane.org" Cc: 34749@debbugs.gnu.org To: martin rudalics Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Mar 08 14:30:19 2019 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1h2FZr-000Sqc-DN for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Fri, 08 Mar 2019 14:30:19 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:43284 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1h2FZp-0000qu-9p for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Fri, 08 Mar 2019 08:30:17 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:36778) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1h2FM4-0005jD-2M for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 08 Mar 2019 08:16:05 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1h2FM3-0003OJ-De for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 08 Mar 2019 08:16:04 -0500 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]:50621) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1h2FM3-0003M5-9D for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 08 Mar 2019 08:16:03 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1h2FM1-0006WS-NJ for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 08 Mar 2019 08:16:01 -0500 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Eli Zaretskii Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Fri, 08 Mar 2019 13:16:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 34749 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs Original-Received: via spool by 34749-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B34749.155205093825044 (code B ref 34749); Fri, 08 Mar 2019 13:16:01 +0000 Original-Received: (at 34749) by debbugs.gnu.org; 8 Mar 2019 13:15:38 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:35932 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1h2FLd-0006Vr-Qq for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 08 Mar 2019 08:15:38 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:50493) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1h2FLZ-0006Vc-I1 for 34749@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 08 Mar 2019 08:15:35 -0500 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]:37600) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1h2FLQ-0008Ov-Fn; Fri, 08 Mar 2019 08:15:24 -0500 Original-Received: from [176.228.60.248] (port=3942 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1h2FLM-00070G-OZ; Fri, 08 Mar 2019 08:15:21 -0500 In-reply-to: <5C824BAC.4090907@gmx.at> (message from martin rudalics on Fri, 08 Mar 2019 12:02:04 +0100) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 209.51.188.43 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" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.bugs:156143 Archived-At: > Date: Fri, 08 Mar 2019 12:02:04 +0100 > From: martin rudalics > CC: drew.adams@oracle.com, 34749@debbugs.gnu.org > > About "what behavior would be best if (as it seems) we still need to > design this". I don't use this function so I don't have any ideas > about what behavior would be best. I think we should simply try letting the user provide all possible values of the FRAME argument in interactive invocations, by using different forms of 'C-u'. > > Why is Emacs behaving unlike the doc string says? > > I think because this function has to work in some ad hoc manner, for > example, when a window is not dedicated and alone on its frame. The > initial claim "Delete all windows showing BUFFER-OR-NAME." is simply > wrong in this regard. Maybe we should say "Try to delete all windows > showing BUFFER-OR-NAME." instead. That'd be too radical, IMO. I'd rather we described the exceptional cases, because I think they would be rare. Can you enumerate those exceptions? > But I'm not keen rewriting this doc-string because I never documented > the behavior of the prefix argument as Drew requested. I simply don't > understand how that works. I think it would be better to rework the interpretation of the prefix arg so it makes sense. Thanks.