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#6204: vc-dir always splits the frame Date: Wed, 26 May 2010 09:54:26 -0400 Message-ID: References: <4jwrv35d7a.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> <878w7fa7cr.fsf@mail.jurta.org> <4BF504B4.50408@gmx.at> <4BF5736B.1030605@gmx.at> <4BF79ABA.7080006@gmx.at> <87ljbbv4u4.fsf@mail.jurta.org> <87y6fbqtq2.fsf@mail.jurta.org> <4BF91C54.4070608@gmx.at> <4BF97C5B.409@gmx.at> <4BFBEE76.7000003@gmx.at> <4BFC099E.2000404@gmx.at> <87bpc3oo6l.fsf@mail.jurta.org> <4BFCDBFA.8030700@gmx.at> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1274882260 12851 80.91.229.12 (26 May 2010 13:57:40 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 26 May 2010 13:57:40 +0000 (UTC) Cc: 6204@debbugs.gnu.org To: martin rudalics Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed May 26 15:57:38 2010 connect(): No such file or directory 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 1OHH72-0007eI-Hz for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Wed, 26 May 2010 15:57:36 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:46301 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1OHH71-0006mp-Un for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Wed, 26 May 2010 09:57:35 -0400 Original-Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=53264 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1OHH6o-0006kh-Ie for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 26 May 2010 09:57:27 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OHH6n-0001te-Bn for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 26 May 2010 09:57:22 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.43]:43923) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OHH6n-0001ta-AY for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 26 May 2010 09:57:21 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OHH4X-0007Ze-Lu; Wed, 26 May 2010 09:55:01 -0400 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: Wed, 26 May 2010 13:55:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 6204 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: Original-Received: via spool by 6204-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B6204.127488207929108 (code B ref 6204); Wed, 26 May 2010 13:55:01 +0000 Original-Received: (at 6204) by debbugs.gnu.org; 26 May 2010 13:54:39 +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 1OHH4A-0007ZR-F9 for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 26 May 2010 09:54:38 -0400 Original-Received: from ironport2-out.teksavvy.com ([206.248.154.181] helo=ironport2-out.pppoe.ca) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OHH48-0007ZM-Ku for 6204@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 26 May 2010 09:54:37 -0400 X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AvsEABPF/EtLd+tS/2dsb2JhbACeH3LBJoUTBIxC X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.53,304,1272859200"; d="scan'208";a="65444494" Original-Received: from 75-119-235-82.dsl.teksavvy.com (HELO pastel.home) ([75.119.235.82]) by ironport2-out.pppoe.ca with ESMTP; 26 May 2010 09:54:31 -0400 Original-Received: by pastel.home (Postfix, from userid 20848) id 6415880E5; Wed, 26 May 2010 09:54:26 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: <4BFCDBFA.8030700@gmx.at> (martin rudalics's message of "Wed, 26 May 2010 10:29:46 +0200") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.0.50 (gnu/linux) X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.11 Precedence: list Resent-Date: Wed, 26 May 2010 09:55:01 -0400 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:37292 Archived-At: > "As a special case, if FRAME-PARAMETERS contains (same-window . t) ..." > so should we now say > "As another special case, if FRAME-PARAMETERS contains > (other-window . t) ..." We also have (same-frame . t), and we came to the conclusion at some other point that we also want to have something like `nearby' (i.e. other-window but close) or `near-minibuffer' (tho maybe `nearby' is sufficient if near-minibuffer is only needed when the minibuffer is the selected windows). I feel like maybe these shouldn't be all separate parameters, but instead we may want to have a single `where' parameter whose value could then say `same-window', `other-window'. OTOH we probably to be able to specify some of the independently (I'm think mostly of `same-frame'). So maybe it should be split into `which-frame' which could be `same' or `other' or nil, and then `where' which could be `same-window', or `other-window', or `nearby', or nil. Then we can even imagine in a distant future that the `other-frame' case could pay attention to the `where' parameter to decide which other frame to use and (if creating a new frame) where to place that frame. Stefan