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: Prefer to split along the longest edge Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2024 16:12:56 +0200 Message-ID: <86ed25m653.fsf@gnu.org> References: <87r06a3yfg.fsf@mail.linkov.net> <87zfkx2ydr.fsf@mail.linkov.net> <8734io2hac.fsf@mail.linkov.net> <86pllrpn2p.fsf@gnu.org> <87ikrjfrq3.fsf@mail.linkov.net> <86jzbzphu0.fsf@gnu.org> <87ikrjcue1.fsf@mail.linkov.net> <86frmnpfoq.fsf@gnu.org> <87ikrihkgc.fsf@mail.linkov.net> <1fa88791-a5be-4897-a3fb-dbf0be5782c5@gmx.at> <86ikrio2lf.fsf@gnu.org> <89d19d67-cf76-4441-b8d6-c30e6f8118d9@gmx.at> Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="1515"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: nicolas.despres@gmail.com, juri@linkov.net, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: martin rudalics Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Wed Dec 18 15:14:49 2024 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 1tNup6-0000G0-Ps for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Wed, 18 Dec 2024 15:14:49 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1tNuo9-0002XD-Rd; Wed, 18 Dec 2024 09:13:49 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1tNuo2-0002OE-LF for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 18 Dec 2024 09:13:45 -0500 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1tNuo1-0007SB-2a; Wed, 18 Dec 2024 09:13:41 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gnu.org; s=fencepost-gnu-org; h=References:Subject:In-Reply-To:To:From:Date: mime-version; bh=paEcjlcqXaUxQT74mNI24NOyDYx7Ix1pljTuZVkHSis=; b=Ze5gd73eXg17 hgO7VMnlKI3GSNf+DJO4Py7jH4uA3il2WD0zPdvs9Y26raeM0b3Weqx5YtIpyzVLD1p+SzvsFDd2F lMYZ14r7h3NzxvzaepRx70Mn6iZ59wFi7WkYWvYcdR3/AmVjfgjoRlR2Hl2KDhU1kLVl3dI1foVVE l9mIHNCtSfQ9JpNOOGmBOWQHy89hI+u0qnz6EkeypkF6qESFKTr7kXgookGhR1QzYR1oa1YjNsyn/ VhI+0Mfap/whJrMLjVuwsGiWIN9ksZGZkgOUAioxzgxDlVyHMCIfmlhNzgmgNIEK4NPIc9BZIMmRp 9jUlgSCt+dwrDuEE8P4QmQ==; In-Reply-To: <89d19d67-cf76-4441-b8d6-c30e6f8118d9@gmx.at> (message from martin rudalics on Wed, 18 Dec 2024 11:05:55 +0100) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:326655 Archived-At: > Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2024 11:05:55 +0100 > Cc: nicolas.despres@gmail.com, juri@linkov.net, emacs-devel@gnu.org > From: martin rudalics > > > It could be both. But I firmly object to make this be customizable > > _only_ through display-buffer action alists, because that is even less > > user-friendly than function values of defcustoms. > > If we make this and other display buffer options a defcustom too, we'd > have to specify the semantics of that defcustom. In particular: To clarify: I was talking only about this particular toggle, not about "other display-buffer options". The difference is that those other options already exist, so removing or redesigning them is not easy at best, and thus probably isn't worth our while. > - Should the defcustom hold for any buffer to be displayed? > > - Should it override what the calling program specifies in the ALIST > argument. > > - Would a 'display-buffer-alist' entry override it? > > Once these have been resolved, we can easily add defcustoms for most > options that are currently only available via 'display-buffer-alist'. I don't necessarily see how the above questions are relevant to the issue at hand. AFAIU, the OP asked for a capability to tell Emacs to split horizontally first instead of vertically. My interpretation of that is that this desire is global, for all the use cases. So a single global option seems appropriate, and my personal answer to the above questions would be YES to the first one at least. As for the other two: can display-buffer-alist specify the splitting behavior this today? If not, I don't see why we should forcibly introduce such a possibility, which will then require us to consider who can override whom. If display-buffer-alist cannot specify splitting, then the problem with overriding doesn't exist.