From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Drew Adams Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: RE: About the 'minibuffer' frame parameter Date: Fri, 5 Aug 2016 11:37:57 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <3e5c74c4-40ae-4b6e-8e8e-444306abb189@default> References: <579E3F9E.8020200@gmx.at> <83h9azl4s1.fsf@gnu.org> <57A4C0DE.3060506@gmx.at> <9605148d-fa81-4cbc-ae81-9e1e8bd11362@default> <57A4CE4C.5010901@gmx.at> <57A4D8C3.5030205@gmx.at> NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1470422317 11718 195.159.176.226 (5 Aug 2016 18:38:37 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 5 Aug 2016 18:38:37 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: martin rudalics , Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Aug 05 20:38:33 2016 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1bVk0k-0000xF-V1 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 05 Aug 2016 20:38:23 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:46617 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bVk0h-0001Ph-NL for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 05 Aug 2016 14:38:19 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:41254) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bVk0a-0001Ak-6p for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 05 Aug 2016 14:38:13 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bVk0Y-0008NO-8c for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 05 Aug 2016 14:38:11 -0400 Original-Received: from userp1040.oracle.com ([156.151.31.81]:35101) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bVk0S-0008Mq-Ib; Fri, 05 Aug 2016 14:38:04 -0400 Original-Received: from aserv0022.oracle.com (aserv0022.oracle.com [141.146.126.234]) by userp1040.oracle.com (Sentrion-MTA-4.3.2/Sentrion-MTA-4.3.2) with ESMTP id u75Ic0Hi023015 (version=TLSv1 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Fri, 5 Aug 2016 18:38:00 GMT Original-Received: from userv0122.oracle.com (userv0122.oracle.com [156.151.31.75]) by aserv0022.oracle.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id u75Ibxe8006544 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Fri, 5 Aug 2016 18:37:59 GMT Original-Received: from abhmp0004.oracle.com (abhmp0004.oracle.com [141.146.116.10]) by userv0122.oracle.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id u75IbwoC004455; Fri, 5 Aug 2016 18:37:58 GMT In-Reply-To: <57A4D8C3.5030205@gmx.at> X-Priority: 3 X-Mailer: Oracle Beehive Extensions for Outlook 2.0.1.9 (901082) [OL 12.0.6744.5000 (x86)] X-Source-IP: aserv0022.oracle.com [141.146.126.234] 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: 2.1.21 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" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:206432 Archived-At: > > Dunno what you mean by "care about it". >=20 > Care about the issue(s) that started this thread. They are not clear to me, even on re-reading. > > Just what are you proposing > > to change, so as to no longer "care about it"? >=20 > Nothing. As long as nobody cares about these issues. I don't know what the issues are. But I definitely care about frame parameter `minibuffer'. But if you are proposing doing "Nothing" then I guess I have nothing to worry about. ;-) > I don't want to eliminate anything. Good. > > And I believe that Juanma's frameset code carefully distinguishes > > standalone minibuffer frames from others, by checking that parameter. > > > > I think that Emacs users should continue to be able to test, as well > > as set the `minibuffer' frame parameter. Why shouldn't they? >=20 > Because IIUC they do not care much about "testing" it. Otherwise they > would have complained already. What is the problem with testing it? frameset.el tests it. And I test it. I `redirect-frame-focus' of a minibuffer-less frame for *Completions* to my standalone minibuffer frame, for example: (let ((redirect (if (active-minibuffer-window) 1on1-minibuffer-frame (and completion-reference-buffer (get-buffer-window completion-reference-buffer 'visible) (not (eq (get-buffer "*Completions*") completion-reference-buffer)) (window-frame (get-buffer-window completion-reference-buffer t)))))) (when redirect (redirect-frame-focus (selected-frame) redirect))) Okay, I don't actually test the frame parameter here explicitly, but the code depends on it being and acting as it does, I think.