From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Stefan Monnier Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#7368: Testcase Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2010 16:25:56 -0500 Message-ID: References: <87y690q1qa.fsf@neo.paramonovs> <4CDE4D2D.2000304@gmx.at> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1289943870 2803 80.91.229.12 (16 Nov 2010 21:44:30 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2010 21:44:30 +0000 (UTC) Cc: 7368@debbugs.gnu.org To: =?UTF-8?Q?=D0=90=D0=BD=D0=B4=D1=80=D0=B5=D0=B9_?= =?UTF-8?Q?=D0=9F=D0=B0=D1=80=D0=B0=D0=BC=D0=BE=D0=BD=D0=BE=D0=B2?= Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Nov 16 22:44:25 2010 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1PITKC-0005xz-S3 for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Tue, 16 Nov 2010 22:44:25 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:33853 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1PITKC-0005aN-9H for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Tue, 16 Nov 2010 16:44:24 -0500 Original-Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=45020 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1PITK6-0005a7-RK for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 16 Nov 2010 16:44:19 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1PITK5-0001la-Ph for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 16 Nov 2010 16:44:18 -0500 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.43]:59885) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1PITK5-0001lW-Mb for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 16 Nov 2010 16:44:17 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1PISyX-000898-QJ; Tue, 16 Nov 2010 16:22:01 -0500 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Stefan Monnier Original-Sender: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Resent-To: owner@debbugs.gnu.org Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2010 21:22:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 7368 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: Original-Received: via spool by 7368-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B7368.128994246531303 (code B ref 7368); Tue, 16 Nov 2010 21:22:01 +0000 Original-Received: (at 7368) by debbugs.gnu.org; 16 Nov 2010 21:21:05 +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 1PISxc-00088q-HO for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 16 Nov 2010 16:21:04 -0500 Original-Received: from pruche.dit.umontreal.ca ([132.204.246.22]) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1PISxa-00088P-4O for 7368@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 16 Nov 2010 16:21:02 -0500 Original-Received: from faina.iro.umontreal.ca (lechon.iro.umontreal.ca [132.204.27.242]) by pruche.dit.umontreal.ca (8.14.1/8.14.1) with ESMTP id oAGLQ1dj010709; Tue, 16 Nov 2010 16:26:01 -0500 Original-Received: by faina.iro.umontreal.ca (Postfix, from userid 20848) id BF34B130096; Tue, 16 Nov 2010 16:25:56 -0500 (EST) In-Reply-To: ("=?UTF-8?Q?=D0=90=D0=BD=D0=B4=D1=80=D0=B5=D0=B9_?= =?UTF-8?Q?=D0=9F=D0=B0=D1=80=D0=B0=D0=BC=D0=BE=D0=BD=D0=BE=D0=B2?="'s message of "Tue, 16 Nov 2010 23:19:50 +0300") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.0.50 (gnu/linux) X-NAI-Spam-Score: 0 X-NAI-Spam-Rules: 1 Rules triggered RV3681=0 X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.11 Precedence: list Resent-Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2010 16:22:01 -0500 X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 3) 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: , Original-Sender: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.bugs:41674 Archived-At: > After another debug session I see that there are 2 types of special windows: > 1) A "softly dedicated" window is a window with 2 properties: > a) it is tied to a certain buffer, and when that buffer is destroyed > the window is destroyed too; > b) it cannot be target of display-buffer. > 2) A "truly dedicated" window is a window with 3 properties: > a) it is tied to a certain buffer, and when that buffer is destroyed > the window is destroyed too; > b) it cannot be target of display-buffer; > c) it cannot be target of switch-to-buffer. > Wouldn't it be more logical to have the following? > 1) A "softly dedicated" window is a window tied to a certain buffer, > and when that buffer is destroyed the window is destroyed too. I think in general that would not be right (e.g. for my use of soft-dedicated windows). But I agree that display-buffer should probably override the soft-dedication in the case where it would otherwise have to create a new frame and the user has pop-up-frames set to nil. Stefan