Re: Question about üarent-frame changes

[Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>]

> Date: Thu, 19 Sep 2024 10:10:11 +0200
> Cc: gerd.moellmann@gmail.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org
> From: martin rudalics <rudalics@gmx.at>
> 
>  > sounds not very useful to me on a TTY, because switching frames on a
>  > TTY will make the child frame invisible anyway.  And why would I want
>  > to see a child of frame F1 when I display only frame F2?
> 
> Because the calling code may reparent the child frame from F1 to F2
> whenever the user switches from frame F1 to frame F2.  At least Po Lu
> said that applications do such reparenting.

Isn't that the same as simply showing the child frame even though its
parent frame is obscured?

And I'd need to hear more details about what the application wants to
achieve by such reparenting, to understand the issue.

>  > So reparenting seems almost pointless on a TTY.
> 
> If the application asks for it, we'd have to decide what to do.  Clone
> the child frame in some way, for example, so that while there are two
> physical child frames - one for F1 and one for F2 - the application sees
> only one.

What do those applications do now on TTY displays, when child frames
are not available at all?  We should keep the current situation in
mind when assessing the potential damage of not supporting
reparenting.  Assessing that from the POV of what is available on GUI
displays skews the perspective.

And once again: if implementing reparenting is not hard, I'm not
objected to having it.  All I'm saying is that it sounds like not
having that on TTYs will not be a huge loss, and the feature will be
useful enough even without that -- if implementing that is hard.