From: "Drew Adams" <drew.adams@oracle.com>
To: "'martin rudalics'" <rudalics@gmx.at>
Cc: 7533@debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: bug#7533: 24.0.50; `dired-mark-pop-up': delete frame afterwards if `pop-up-frames'
Date: Fri, 6 Apr 2012 10:08:48 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <C4AEDA1DA22A4B569C14C73E9A2EA814@us.oracle.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4F7F203F.90101@gmx.at>
> > For emacs -Q:
> >
> > Without my fix and with your patch the frame is iconified,
> > without changing `frame-auto-hide-function'.
> >
> > Without my fix and with your patch the frame is deleted, if
> > `frame-auto-hide-function' is `delete-frame'.
>
> That's what this option has been meant for.
Yes, in the general case. It is a general user option. IMO, it does not apply
here, that is, it should not govern the behavior here.
> > I can't judge what it should default to because I hardly ever
> > use multiple frames and never use `dired'.
We've been around the default-value barn several times already. Stefan wants
iconifying as the default. I'm happy if users can at least customize it to get
deletion.
> > My point was that users should not have to customize this
> > option just to fix this regression. It is reasonable for
> > a user to prefer iconifying for frames that s?he wants to
> > keep, but still, naturally, want this frame to be deleted, as
> > it has no reason for being anymore.
>
> We can consider adding a third value for `frame-auto-hide-function'.
I think that's blowing things out of proportion. There is no need for a user
option for this. A user option is for general behavior. Unless, that is, you
can characterize such behavior as a general class that is recognizable. But I
thought that was the problem: no "dialog" thingy exists.
IMO, the proper fix here is specific to this command. And to any others that we
run into that pop up a frame only temporarily, for the duration of some well
defined (recognizable) user interaction.
> > If you were not averse to binding a user option for a
> > local use, perhaps you could just bind `frame-auto-hide-function'
> > to `delete-frame' for the duration of the command. That should
> > DTRT, and such a temporary binding should not bother
> > anyone (IMHO).
>
> If we decide that deleting the frame is the correct solution in this
> particular case, the most simple option is to call `quit-window' with
> both arguments t, thus killing the buffer as well.
Sounds good to me, IIUC. Does anyone claim that deleting the frame (& window &
buffer) is not the correct solution in this situation?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-04-06 17:08 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 37+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-12-02 18:35 bug#7533: 24.0.50; `dired-mark-pop-up': delete frame afterwards if `pop-up-frames' Drew Adams
2010-12-02 19:05 ` martin rudalics
2010-12-02 19:22 ` Drew Adams
2010-12-03 8:17 ` martin rudalics
2010-12-03 16:22 ` Drew Adams
2010-12-03 18:16 ` martin rudalics
2010-12-03 18:33 ` Drew Adams
2010-12-03 18:41 ` martin rudalics
2010-12-04 22:44 ` Chong Yidong
2010-12-16 18:27 ` Drew Adams
2010-12-17 6:32 ` martin rudalics
2010-12-17 15:32 ` Drew Adams
2010-12-17 16:12 ` martin rudalics
2010-12-17 16:55 ` Drew Adams
2010-12-17 18:09 ` martin rudalics
2010-12-17 18:40 ` Drew Adams
2010-12-21 6:48 ` Chong Yidong
2010-12-03 20:27 ` Stefan Monnier
2012-04-05 20:23 ` Drew Adams
2012-04-06 14:02 ` martin rudalics
2012-04-06 14:44 ` Drew Adams
2012-04-06 14:53 ` martin rudalics
2012-04-06 15:34 ` Drew Adams
2012-04-06 15:47 ` martin rudalics
2012-04-06 16:10 ` Drew Adams
2012-04-06 16:56 ` martin rudalics
2012-04-06 17:08 ` Drew Adams [this message]
2012-04-18 14:32 ` Drew Adams
2012-05-25 20:52 ` Drew Adams
2012-05-26 17:55 ` bug#7533: 24.0.50; `dired-mark-pop-up': delete frame afterwards if `pop-up-frames' [PATCH] Drew Adams
2012-05-27 13:21 ` martin rudalics
2012-05-27 14:33 ` Drew Adams
2011-01-18 22:14 ` bug#7533: 24.0.50; `dired-mark-pop-up': delete frame afterwards if `pop-up-frames' Drew Adams
2012-09-05 14:30 ` martin rudalics
2012-09-05 14:33 ` Drew Adams
2012-10-03 9:11 ` martin rudalics
2012-10-03 15:52 ` Drew Adams
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
List information: https://www.gnu.org/software/emacs/
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=C4AEDA1DA22A4B569C14C73E9A2EA814@us.oracle.com \
--to=drew.adams@oracle.com \
--cc=7533@debbugs.gnu.org \
--cc=rudalics@gmx.at \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this public inbox
https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/emacs.git
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).