From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: How about making `set-minibuffer-window' obsolete? Date: Wed, 17 Mar 2021 15:17:33 +0200 Message-ID: <83sg4tdimq.fsf@gnu.org> References: <98c16576-39b8-2f34-e9f5-4f5c04c28dcd@gmx.at> Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="19969"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: acm@muc.de, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: martin rudalics Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Wed Mar 17 14:19:26 2021 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1lMW58-00055Q-Dl for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Wed, 17 Mar 2021 14:19:26 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:47792 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lMW57-0004Dy-Eh for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Wed, 17 Mar 2021 09:19:25 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:42376) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lMW3N-00035D-4v for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 17 Mar 2021 09:17:37 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]:35809) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lMW3M-00015Q-2h; Wed, 17 Mar 2021 09:17:36 -0400 Original-Received: from 84.94.185.95.cable.012.net.il ([84.94.185.95]:4959 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1lMW3L-0001hm-D9; Wed, 17 Mar 2021 09:17:35 -0400 In-Reply-To: <98c16576-39b8-2f34-e9f5-4f5c04c28dcd@gmx.at> (message from martin rudalics on Wed, 17 Mar 2021 09:44:37 +0100) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 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-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:266522 Archived-At: > From: martin rudalics > Date: Wed, 17 Mar 2021 09:44:37 +0100 > > Rather `set-minibuffer-window' should take as argument a frame to set > the 'minibuffer-window' parameter of that frame. This way it would > become the counterpart of `minibuffer-window' which takes as argument a > frame and returns that frame's minibuffer window. I'm okay with extending this function that way (assuming the additional parameter is made &optional). > The current semantics of `set-minibuffer-window' is of no practical use. Why not? how is it different from the C code doing the same? > Lisp code should never deal with minibuf_window directly. This seems to contradict what you propose above, doesn't it? Or what am I missing? > However, every minibuffer interaction should be aware of the fact > that any frame's minibuffer window might change via > fset_minibuffer_window under its feet. Yes, using these facilities is not for the faint at heart. But that doesn't mean it can never be useful, IMO.