Re: [Emacs-diffs] master 7cfe2dc: In edebug in GUIs, move focus to the selected frame.

Re: [Emacs-diffs] master 7cfe2dc: In edebug in GUIs, move focus to the selected frame.

[Stefan Monnier]

Hi Alan,

>    (edebug-pop-to-buffer edebug-buffer)
> +  (edebug-focus-frame (window-frame (selected-window)))
[...]
> -      (edebug-pop-to-buffer edebug-buffer (car edebug-window-data)))))
> +      (edebug-pop-to-buffer edebug-buffer (car edebug-window-data))
> +      (edebug-focus-frame (window-frame (selected-window))))))
[...]
> -  (edebug-pop-to-buffer edebug-eval-buffer))
> +  (edebug-pop-to-buffer edebug-eval-buffer)
> +  (edebug-focus-frame (window-frame (selected-window))))

Maybe edebug-pop-to-buffer should call edebug-focus-frame?


        Stefan

Re: [Emacs-diffs] master 7cfe2dc: In edebug in GUIs, move focus to the selected frame.

[Alan Mackenzie]

Hello, Stefan.

On Fri, Oct 19, 2018 at 13:58:44 -0400, Stefan Monnier wrote:
> Hi Alan,

> >    (edebug-pop-to-buffer edebug-buffer)
> > +  (edebug-focus-frame (window-frame (selected-window)))
> [...]
> > -      (edebug-pop-to-buffer edebug-buffer (car edebug-window-data)))))
> > +      (edebug-pop-to-buffer edebug-buffer (car edebug-window-data))
> > +      (edebug-focus-frame (window-frame (selected-window))))))
> [...]
> > -  (edebug-pop-to-buffer edebug-eval-buffer))
> > +  (edebug-pop-to-buffer edebug-eval-buffer)
> > +  (edebug-focus-frame (window-frame (selected-window))))

> Maybe edebug-pop-to-buffer should call edebug-focus-frame?

I thought about that, but in the end decided that could be a bit heavy
for when information is only being displayed, i.e. in
edebug-trace-display.  Maybe putting the call in e-pop-to-buffer would
indeed be better.  But I think edebug-trace-display would have then to
call edebug-focus-frame explicitly after re-selecting the original
window.

This bit of the code surely originates from the time before frames were
implemented.

>         Stefan

-- 
Alan Mackenzie (Nuremberg, Germany).

Re: [Emacs-diffs] master 7cfe2dc: In edebug in GUIs, move focus to the selected frame.

[Stefan Monnier]

> I thought about that, but in the end decided that could be a bit heavy
> for when information is only being displayed, i.e. in
> edebug-trace-display.

If the intention is only to display the code shouldn't use pop-to-buffer
but display-buffer.

> This bit of the code surely originates from the time before frames were
> implemented.

[ Probably, but since most Emacs users don't actually make use of multiple
  frames, a lot of code written much more recently also suffers from the
  same kinds of "outdated" assumptions.  ]
  

        Stefan

Re: [Emacs-diffs] master 7cfe2dc: In edebug in GUIs, move focus to the selected frame.

[Alan Mackenzie]

Hello, Stefan.

On Fri, Oct 19, 2018 at 15:07:42 -0400, Stefan Monnier wrote:
> > I thought about that, but in the end decided that could be a bit heavy
> > for when information is only being displayed, i.e. in
> > edebug-trace-display.

> If the intention is only to display the code shouldn't use pop-to-buffer
> but display-buffer.

The doc string of display-buffer is a bit of a heavy read at this time
of night.  ;-)

> > This bit of the code surely originates from the time before frames were
> > implemented.

> [ Probably, but since most Emacs users don't actually make use of multiple
>   frames, a lot of code written much more recently also suffers from the
>   same kinds of "outdated" assumptions.  ]

Most Emacs users restrict themselves to just one frame?  Ouch!  I
couldn't work like that!

>         Stefan

-- 
Alan Mackenzie (Nuremberg, Germany).

Re: [Emacs-diffs] master 7cfe2dc: In edebug in GUIs, move focus to the selected frame.

[Davis Herring]

> Most Emacs users restrict themselves to just one frame?  Ouch!  I
> couldn't work like that!

I don't pretend to know the general statistics, but my Emacs sessions 
(not counting the occasional short-lived instance) typically have two or 
three frames, but no more.  In a windowed Emacs, I find it 
counterproductive to have more than will (along with terminals and so 
forth) tile the screen, since they tend to fight over buffers and I have 
to go hunting.  In a terminal, I'm instead limited by how many window 
configurations I can keep in my head (but it's about the same number).

Davis

-- 
This product is sold by volume, not by mass.  If it appears too dense or 
too sparse, it is because mass-energy conversion has occurred during 
shipping.

Re: [Emacs-diffs] master 7cfe2dc: In edebug in GUIs, move focus to the selected frame.

[Alan Mackenzie]

Hello, Davis.

On Fri, Oct 19, 2018 at 13:39:09 -0600, Davis Herring wrote:
> > Most Emacs users restrict themselves to just one frame?  Ouch!  I
> > couldn't work like that!

> I don't pretend to know the general statistics, but my Emacs sessions
> (not counting the occasional short-lived instance) typically have two
> or three frames, but no more.  In a windowed Emacs, I find it
> counterproductive to have more than will (along with terminals and so
> forth) tile the screen, since they tend to fight over buffers and I
> have to go hunting.  In a terminal, I'm instead limited by how many
> window configurations I can keep in my head (but it's about the same
> number).

I tend frequently to go up to 8 or 9 frames on a tty, with one "big" file
(such as cc-engine.el) in follow-mode per frame, or two or three "small"
buffers (such as test files, *Help*, *Occur*) in other frames.  I have no
trouble maintaining a mental map of what's where, and I use the function
keys F1 - F11 to switch instantly to any frame F1 - F11.

When I need to work in a GUI, I tend to have fewer frames, each one
occupying almost the entire screen area, and still switching between them
with the function keys.

> Davis

> -- 
> This product is sold by volume, not by mass.  If it appears too dense or 
> too sparse, it is because mass-energy conversion has occurred during 
> shipping.

-- 
Alan Mackenzie (Nuremberg, Germany).

Re: [Emacs-diffs] master 7cfe2dc: In edebug in GUIs, move focus to the selected frame.

[Stefan Monnier]

>> If the intention is only to display the code shouldn't use pop-to-buffer
>> but display-buffer.
> The doc string of display-buffer is a bit of a heavy read at this time
> of night.  ;-)

pop-to-buffer is no simpler: it's basically the same as (select-window
(display-buffer BUF)).

BTW, pop-to-buffer already calls `select-frame-set-input-focus`.
And I see that edebug-pop-to-buffer doesn't call pop-to-buffer, and that
it comes with:

    ;; FIXME: We should probably just be using `pop-to-buffer'.

So maybe the better path is indeed to scratch edebug-pop-to-buffer and
use pop-to-buffer instead (or more likely, to change
edebug-pop-to-buffer so that it uses pop-to-buffer internally).

> Most Emacs users restrict themselves to just one frame?  Ouch!  I
> couldn't work like that!

At least, that's the conclusion I draw from years of fighting code using
save-window-excursion and such.


        Stefan

Re: [Emacs-diffs] master 7cfe2dc: In edebug in GUIs, move focus to the selected frame.

[Alan Mackenzie]

Hello, Stefan.

On Fri, Oct 19, 2018 at 17:12:38 -0400, Stefan Monnier wrote:
> >> If the intention is only to display the code shouldn't use pop-to-buffer
> >> but display-buffer.
> > The doc string of display-buffer is a bit of a heavy read at this time
> > of night.  ;-)

> pop-to-buffer is no simpler: it's basically the same as (select-window
> (display-buffer BUF)).

> BTW, pop-to-buffer already calls `select-frame-set-input-focus`.
> And I see that edebug-pop-to-buffer doesn't call pop-to-buffer, and that
> it comes with:

>     ;; FIXME: We should probably just be using `pop-to-buffer'.

> So maybe the better path is indeed to scratch edebug-pop-to-buffer and
> use pop-to-buffer instead (or more likely, to change
> edebug-pop-to-buffer so that it uses pop-to-buffer internally).

I've thought about this overnight.  And I think the answer is no, it
would not be better to use pop-to-buffer.  At least, not if an ACTION
argument needs to be constructed.

The specification of the ACTION argument seems so arcane, so implicit, so
difficult to use, that it will be simpler just to write a function such
as edebug-pop-to-buffer.  edebug-pop-to-buffer will also be much easier
to understand and maintain than an equivalent using pop-to-buffer with an
ACTION.

In short, pop-to-buffer and display-buffer with ACTION seem to be
"pyrrhic functions".  At least, that's how I see it from reading the doc,
not having yet tried to use them.  Also, edebug-pop-to-buffer already
exists and works.

There are around 479 calls to these two functions in the Emacs source.  A
quick eyeballing of the grep results found just one single use of ACTION,
in replace.el.  I dare say there are more, but very few altogether.

>         Stefan

-- 
Alan Mackenzie (Nuremberg, Germany).