From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: martin rudalics Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: About the 'minibuffer' frame parameter Date: Tue, 09 Aug 2016 19:34:20 +0200 Message-ID: <57AA141C.5010701@gmx.at> References: <579E3F9E.8020200@gmx.at> <83h9azl4s1.fsf@gnu.org> <57A4C0DE.3060506@gmx.at> <837fbvkofs.fsf@gnu.org> <57A5AF03.30807@gmx.at> <8360rck7kd.fsf@gnu.org> <57A84256.8030706@gmx.at> <83popji89w.fsf@gnu.org> <57A9940B.6030005@gmx.at> <8337mehu5u.fsf@gnu.org> <57A9FFDE.10106@gmx.at> <83pophhq1a.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1470765993 21164 195.159.176.226 (9 Aug 2016 18:06:33 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 9 Aug 2016 18:06:33 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Aug 09 20:06:28 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 1bXBQ3-0005Ia-QP for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 09 Aug 2016 20:06:28 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:37241 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bXBPo-0003Sv-Le for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 09 Aug 2016 14:06:12 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:42327) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bXAvH-0007QW-O6 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 09 Aug 2016 13:34:43 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bXAvF-0004eY-RB for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 09 Aug 2016 13:34:38 -0400 Original-Received: from mout.gmx.net ([212.227.17.21]:51979) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bXAv8-0004db-LH; Tue, 09 Aug 2016 13:34:30 -0400 Original-Received: from [192.168.1.100] ([212.95.7.105]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx103) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0Lz3JU-1bBOuC2soC-014Cc2; Tue, 09 Aug 2016 19:34:28 +0200 In-Reply-To: <83pophhq1a.fsf@gnu.org> X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:0Co98WDHQqYl2nwt7aLOiRT/x1fMOj7fWNkMlMNwFTQgTf1vLTk cN7iYO4nJXRMf0raOvSYhO4rKFbowjP0iCmIIc+pM1QvHP5hu8tE5e0mB/VT3yvBITo8kfx L58EL2re22XVfL8a88dgCEZ8nAwur9lfnSCPHT4u25nXJX748tigAKnbhritvOKnr70Juhh AivsgGceSZY/Jvj1P3HZA== X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V01:K0:ND6TjVFHJXo=:ZYkxcNHbsoJCVQzY3WwEm/ LMA74YZNsgoj6krPYc2bjkuuomIoIb9UV8UpGHpjBrGoRLfCQ75/kVKtMRw3hxpewdVvI6X+F yxXzye8XMaPangGXh+mydvOLpoe0Rbr6BxDObJEXF2doimlkAq9+MIKRSm8DUBDhveaJd0JZq KzO8H1HQfNFy3tose51sjJcFidOrQwwV8cLWGolFWznav7JazXIbt3E+G7ls984qozSAda5M1 UOktxC69CvFpVYa3aDRnznRVFGf26JiBwODczQ8KAY/BmiqCjZ+zbetCXL4gCb8OPx+3KJib6 Qo8Ygzza94DcrTXHoaRXQmIPCJoKLNYlKFmBJKIOdAB5eHlsL1x6BUatye6PWfpNtOQa5ehYW vD3jpZ+hEDDjpYCbjZxp06pxXhhfW1K+eO3DCkB89ufZSeMYr+qmx84h4UPUo+6OTn6OuAs3O MAeGYP+Xsk3yXDGRwyvfqX9glyZmnNWLaBKBX+81P5iK1pvwhnJBAufvHIRSSvfjTiKWeLljs Wx0wFyIN7Lpv2vGywZllqK2BVYpZumZQz2gYgMMSlU+fJ9zFJKlLJHvVVS2GUvHhJQKQnJM8r tn8oeJnOXvlUCwZlZrj/0Dtc77aSrIA+VsAJfaFgu/O/nAhquRJiz0g+t2c+zHYnxsGZEoYGC g5rzXcAnym7fdqyGr8RePPqZ96kY4qlmz+9TY3tj3o3t31OCAwwK2BOfGRasp1dM0I5zi3Bcy r50iFaVsZppfDe9b9QLGErn48C1djrAJ454nWrYHcmUzShb+15+Gbfp0poLY9fooJSx+59At X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 212.227.17.21 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:206515 Archived-At: > Another alternative would be to return a window in both cases. But then we can't discriminate minibuffer-less from normal frames by looking at the parameter value only. > We have already a few cases where frame-parameter returns a value > different from the one specified when make-frame was called. There's > nothing wrong about that, if it's Emacs that chooses the actual value.= This goes both ways. With (2) Emacs would choose nil when =E2=80=98set-frame-position=E2=80=99 explicitly asks for a window. And w= ith no 'minibuffer' specified we'd have to return t or a window in any case. > Do you still prefer (2)? I prefer storing a window because then we > could naturally return it, like we do with frame colors. C code never consults the frame parameter. Elisp code currently consults the parameter in four places only, three of them to find out whether the frame is minibuffer-only. If Elisp code wants the window, it uses =E2=80=98minibuffer-window=E2=80=99 which handles all types of fr= ames. And with (2) the values t, nil and 'only' would immediately tell the type of any frame. martin