From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Drew Adams Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: RE: Use of dedicated windows in gdb-mi.el Date: Mon, 9 Feb 2015 11:44:15 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <013f998a-bd26-4938-9112-30a2e95e8dc4@default> References: <87h9uynckc.fsf@gmail.com> <83iofedfkz.fsf@gnu.org> <877fvun97j.fsf@gmail.com> <83fvaid8sa.fsf@gnu.org> <83fvaf9jj2.fsf@gnu.org> <878ug7axhr.fsf@gmail.com> <837fvr9frq.fsf@gnu.org> <87sief9ezy.fsf@gmail.com> <831tlz9deh.fsf@gnu.org> <8761bb9cq8.fsf@gmail.com> <048211e0-0bf4-4c69-8908-aae20a2e58fb@default> <877fvraq0n.fsf@gmail.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1423511086 6867 80.91.229.3 (9 Feb 2015 19:44:46 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 9 Feb 2015 19:44:46 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Eli Zaretskii , thibaut.verron@gmail.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Oleh Krehel Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Feb 09 20:44:46 2015 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@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 1YKuGC-0007IT-MA for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 09 Feb 2015 20:44:44 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:34888 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YKuGC-0006RM-74 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 09 Feb 2015 14:44:44 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:50632) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YKuFy-0006Q9-4c for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 09 Feb 2015 14:44:30 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YKuFx-0002VS-81 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 09 Feb 2015 14:44:30 -0500 Original-Received: from userp1040.oracle.com ([156.151.31.81]:46719) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YKuFs-0002UP-Pc; Mon, 09 Feb 2015 14:44:24 -0500 Original-Received: from acsinet21.oracle.com (acsinet21.oracle.com [141.146.126.237]) by userp1040.oracle.com (Sentrion-MTA-4.3.2/Sentrion-MTA-4.3.2) with ESMTP id t19JiL0A021637 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Mon, 9 Feb 2015 19:44:22 GMT Original-Received: from aserv0121.oracle.com (aserv0121.oracle.com [141.146.126.235]) by acsinet21.oracle.com (8.14.4+Sun/8.14.4) with ESMTP id t19JiLBM018787 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Mon, 9 Feb 2015 19:44:21 GMT Original-Received: from abhmp0002.oracle.com (abhmp0002.oracle.com [141.146.116.8]) by aserv0121.oracle.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id t19JiLNM019976; Mon, 9 Feb 2015 19:44:21 GMT In-Reply-To: <877fvraq0n.fsf@gmail.com> X-Priority: 3 X-Mailer: Oracle Beehive Extensions for Outlook 2.0.1.8.2 (807160) [OL 12.0.6691.5000 (x86)] X-Source-IP: acsinet21.oracle.com [141.146.126.237] X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.4.x-2.6.x [generic] X-Received-From: 156.151.31.81 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:182728 Archived-At: > >> I dislike non-soft dedicated windows because they're bad design. > > > > What's the bad design about having such a possibility? >=20 > You have a window. You switched to it explicitly. You want to change the > buffer that's in it, but you can't. If you want to change the buffer that's in the window, then you don't want a (normally) dedicated window. That doesn't imply bad design. It just says that you did something (made the window dedicated) that you didn't want to do. You shot yourself in the foot. That's just bad aim on the part of the pilot. > To top it off, it looks exactly the same all the other windows, 99.5% of > which that don't behave this way. Not for me, it doesn't. I use options `special-display-frame-alist', `special-display-buffer-names', and `special-display-regexps'. *Messages* corresponds to my value of `special-display-regexps', which is ("[ ]?[*][^*]+[*]"). As such, it gets a different background color from my non-special frames. > Add even on top that it wasn't you who explicitly specified this > behavior for your window. This behavior was simply loaded from a > package. Blame that one on the package. If that's true, and it that behavior is hard-coded and not user-configurable, then THAT is bad design. IMHO.