From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Use of dedicated windows in gdb-mi.el Date: Mon, 09 Feb 2015 20:52:47 +0200 Message-ID: <83zj8m9atc.fsf@gnu.org> References: <87h9uynckc.fsf@gmail.com> <83iofedfkz.fsf@gnu.org> <877fvun97j.fsf@gmail.com> <83fvaid8sa.fsf@gnu.org> <83fvaf9jj2.fsf@gnu.org> <878ug7axhr.fsf@gmail.com> <837fvr9frq.fsf@gnu.org> <87sief9ezy.fsf@gmail.com> <831tlz9deh.fsf@gnu.org> <8761bb9cq8.fsf@gmail.com> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1423507993 19628 80.91.229.3 (9 Feb 2015 18:53:13 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 9 Feb 2015 18:53:13 +0000 (UTC) Cc: thibaut.verron@gmail.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Oleh Krehel Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Feb 09 19:53:12 2015 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 1YKtSJ-0001uj-Qr for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 09 Feb 2015 19:53:11 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:34623 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YKtSJ-0004HF-AR for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 09 Feb 2015 13:53:11 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:33280) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YKtSF-0004DR-HE for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 09 Feb 2015 13:53:08 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YKtSA-0005ii-Tp for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 09 Feb 2015 13:53:07 -0500 Original-Received: from mtaout24.012.net.il ([80.179.55.180]:60981) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YKtSA-0005gK-Hz for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 09 Feb 2015 13:53:02 -0500 Original-Received: from conversion-daemon.mtaout24.012.net.il by mtaout24.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) id <0NJI00B00P4LSA00@mtaout24.012.net.il> for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 09 Feb 2015 20:44:45 +0200 (IST) Original-Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 ([87.69.4.28]) by mtaout24.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) with ESMTPA id <0NJI009K8PEL3030@mtaout24.012.net.il>; Mon, 09 Feb 2015 20:44:45 +0200 (IST) In-reply-to: <8761bb9cq8.fsf@gmail.com> X-012-Sender: halo1@inter.net.il X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6.x X-Received-From: 80.179.55.180 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:182720 Archived-At: > From: Oleh Krehel > Cc: thibaut.verron@gmail.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org > Date: Mon, 09 Feb 2015 19:11:27 +0100 > > >> > Don't you _want_ to see the output of a program you are debugging? > >> > >> Nope. I can see all that I need through "p". The actual program output > >> for my particular program is barely relevant during runtime, and completely > >> irrelevant during debug time. > > > > Then perhaps a better solution would be an option not to pop the > > *output* window at all, so that the need to switch to another buffer > > in that window is eliminated? Would you like such a solution better? > > No this won't work. I don't want *output* in this particular program. I > might want it for others. If the option not to pop it is a defcustom, you can turn it on when you want *output* and off when you don't. > I just want the typical approach of burying a buffer once and then > having it not surface, even if there's new output. The option not to pop it in a window will solve this as well, right? > Just imagine the havoc of *Messages* being a dedicated window and > popping up each time there's a new message, even if you bury it. JFYI, there are people who like to configure Emacs like that. You've just heard from one of them. To each their own. > I dislike non-soft dedicated windows because they're bad design. Others will disagree. gdb-many-windows is for them; if you don't like that, it's very easy not to request those windows. > I guess that I could just advice `set-window-dedicated-p' to be a > noop in all cases. If that's what you prefer. I still think that an option to pop or not to pop the *output* window, which is the only one that opens without your say-so, is a better solution. It gives you what you want without affecting unrelated features and other users. > If you have 9 minutes and a way to view Youtube videos, you can see my > demo of a neat approach to manipulating windows (especially the window > swap). This approach of course won't work with non-soft dedicated > windows: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_qZliI1BKzI. That's cute, but is this related to GDB-MI and the issue being discussed here? If so, how?