From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Rand User Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: split-window as a command Date: Fri, 12 Apr 2013 18:44:43 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <1365817483.22022.YahooMailNeo@web141205.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> References: <87ppy0p4cm.fsf@rosalinde.fritz.box> <5167D3E8.8000903@gmx.at> <87obdkf097.fsf@rosalinde.fritz.box> <51681696.7000405@gmx.at> <877gk7fhrs.fsf@rosalinde.fritz.box> Reply-To: Rand User NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1365817499 27513 80.91.229.3 (13 Apr 2013 01:44:59 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 13 Apr 2013 01:44:59 +0000 (UTC) To: "emacs-devel@gnu.org" Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Apr 13 03:45:02 2013 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 1UQpWX-0008Nb-Hp for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 13 Apr 2013 03:45:01 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:38621 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UQpWX-0002s8-1Y for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 12 Apr 2013 21:45:01 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:53419) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UQpWN-0002rY-6R for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 12 Apr 2013 21:44:59 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UQpWI-00075f-DF for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 12 Apr 2013 21:44:51 -0400 Original-Received: from nm21-vm0.bullet.mail.bf1.yahoo.com ([98.139.213.137]:34628) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UQpWH-00074n-RO for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 12 Apr 2013 21:44:46 -0400 Original-Received: from [98.139.212.145] by nm21.bullet.mail.bf1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 13 Apr 2013 01:44:43 -0000 Original-Received: from [98.139.212.222] by tm2.bullet.mail.bf1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 13 Apr 2013 01:44:43 -0000 Original-Received: from [127.0.0.1] by omp1031.mail.bf1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 13 Apr 2013 01:44:43 -0000 X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: ymail-3 X-Yahoo-Newman-Id: 804418.233.bm@omp1031.mail.bf1.yahoo.com Original-Received: (qmail 22207 invoked by uid 60001); 13 Apr 2013 01:44:43 -0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ymail.com; s=s1024; t=1365817483; bh=YD8JUjIyWgwt5EYnqK1EIISyjkjOj5b8wXDGovIMyE4=; h=X-YMail-OSG:Received:X-Rocket-MIMEInfo:X-Mailer:References:Message-ID:Date:From:Reply-To:Subject:To:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=Wk2yt81AEXdw1JtI6Fmy1/B7OWEUfdV3Gx0O/ZjhoTKi/az5pX9u9CQ1+9aQMh+netm/+ou+XAHzFJ4pISqZqznocVip2FlZhTcVQxYZdcE3XETjdNSQRZnKxKt3OdmnLlPCrenBC9TOeanZ4/ZYzbFLPfzgWU+zZMPPGWaUr0g= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=ymail.com; h=X-YMail-OSG:Received:X-Rocket-MIMEInfo:X-Mailer:References:Message-ID:Date:From:Reply-To:Subject:To:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=yg3RlOmaxhA8+9lHd1jHt/vjJHkBUuBYmG3499dBR+fLs/Vo1FrqUcvmTjtWeWsNFL8aaCHQltbDE6zSw7zHBZA9DRg+XbMaxvvqPxX2ur3mPyEqAcBJn1kELNAPrJJB/ZCQGCCK+/kXch2ly0+x+FtUjqgoivHUeWoFMo1Wrds=; X-YMail-OSG: A6S_6cAVM1mQ8ZGsUCYe.4pFXQCnbd_VZhh6G9tY08L8Io1 _RsISnHrUoqFzm0DIKnf7_IWMDOA_2JxP3uAyuRtXqwz_KOIYWGdUlMd8sFu ZxN27T02Wikm2NVQqztZai7SJdKEOBlQbi0jbtfDfpoFb5k0p5jLcHzcPFf1 quHeiWUGtZyRRxqrhdHNyLDuidYnxxvpcFtaNBt1zfK0KVNhGa7vJSKVpI0U rNmiGMSAeCqiuiX4IwHpeLpqop98TNoPfpDU7GKEJ0sNW0HA16SzIPjbBK01 hkHojhz5zPDVTWfPEqslLQpeTiIH775U31wC_bsEwEWrTSqkPBcHfrV6kje5 zdbRI8_XjFYMj0BDtedPs0Y3eHCWhijnSj25uFd.7W44m1bwYQggXJi4pYzu 5b2IegPGCpOgKe69lyB3llcJbIIjKHs57Qno29RQMimex3tJeHQydi5WAHEp cgP577s777Y.qIe_sbIcxCTTFs.uRSw-- Original-Received: from [173.217.221.231] by web141205.mail.bf1.yahoo.com via HTTP; Fri, 12 Apr 2013 18:44:43 PDT X-Rocket-MIMEInfo: 002.001, RnJvbTogU3RlcGhlbiBCZXJtYW4gPHN0ZXBoZW4uYmVybWFuQGdteC5uZXQ.CgoKPiBNYXliZSBpbiB0aGUgZWFybHkgZGF5cyB0aGVyZSB3YXMgbm8gc3BsaXQtd2luZG93LXZlcnRpY2FsbHkgYW5kCj4gc3BsaXQtd2luZG93IHdhcyB0aGUgb25seSB3aW5kb3ctc3BsaXR0aW5nIGNvbW1hbmQgKEkgZG9uJ3Qga25vdykuwqAgQnV0Cj4gYXQgbGVhc3Qgc2luY2UgMTguNTkgKHByb2JhYmx5IGVhcmxpZXIpIHNwbGl0LXdpbmRvdyBoYXMgYmVlbiByZWR1bmRhbnQKPiBhcyBhIGNvbW1hbmQgKGFuZCBub3QgZG8BMAEBAQE- X-Mailer: YahooMailWebService/0.8.140.532 In-Reply-To: <877gk7fhrs.fsf@rosalinde.fritz.box> X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: FreeBSD 8.x X-Received-From: 98.139.213.137 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:158870 Archived-At: From: Stephen Berman =0A=0A=0A> Maybe in the early = days there was no split-window-vertically and=0A> split-window was the only= window-splitting command (I don't know).=A0 But=0A> at least since 18.59 (= probably earlier) split-window has been redundant=0A> as a command (and not= documented in the Emacs manual), and has not had a=0A> default key binding= .=A0=A0=0A=0ATo my knowledge, that's all correct. =A0=0A=0AI kinda figured = that `split-window' was made a command since its easier=0Ato do `M-x split-= window' than `M-x split-window-vertically'.=0A=0A> So any breakage would be= in user settings or third-party packages. =A0=A0=0A=0AThat's the worst kin= d of breakage. =A0Emacs shouldn't break user code=0A=0Afor minor namespace = cleanup. =A0=0A=0A> As for usage, since split-window never acted on a prefi= x=0A=0A> argument, replacing it with split-window-below interactively inste= ad can=0A> only be a win.=0A=0AI agree that `split-window-below' works bett= er interactively than `split-window'=0Adoes. =A0Breaking backward compatibi= lity is not a win however.=0A=0A>> I think that:=0A>>=0A>> * Fixing the doc= -string would be better than removing the=0A>> interactive form.=0A>=0A> Th= at would perpetuate its mistaken current status as a command.=0A=0AI don't = think `split-window' was mistakenly=A0made a command.=0A=0A>> * Changing th= e interactive form to use the prefix argument would=0A>> be better than fix= ing the doc-string.=0A>=0A> That would mean adding code from split-window-b= elow to process the=0A> prefix argument, though split-window-below itself c= alls split-window.=0A> That doesn't seem very clean.=0A=0AThe window splitt= ing code in general doesn't seem very clean... :)=0A=0AMaybe you could move= some of the=A0functionality=A0in split-window-below=0Ato split-window?=0A= =0ACheers,=0A=0ARand