From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Chong Yidong Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Windows' "split status" Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2011 13:08:44 +0800 Message-ID: <87obwc7ixv.fsf@gnu.org> References: <87vcqqoekt.fsf@gnu.org> <4EBD6B63.4050607@gmx.at> <87vcqq6utg.fsf@gnu.org> <4EBE4414.10009@gmx.at> <87d3cwr9hc.fsf@gnu.org> <4EBFA0AF.7000608@gmx.at> <87obwgatpy.fsf@gnu.org> <4EBFFBA5.1000309@gmx.at> <87hb26gdx8.fsf@gnu.org> <4EC213EA.4080304@gmx.at> <871ut9n2rr.fsf@gnu.org> <4EC2820E.7010401@gmx.at> <87y5vhs04e.fsf@mail.jurta.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1321420150 22099 80.91.229.12 (16 Nov 2011 05:09:10 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2011 05:09:10 +0000 (UTC) Cc: martin rudalics , emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Juri Linkov Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Nov 16 06:09:06 2011 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([140.186.70.17]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1RQXk9-0002UG-Sq for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 16 Nov 2011 06:09:06 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:54559 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RQXk8-0003ga-Uy for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 16 Nov 2011 00:09:04 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]:39031) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RQXk2-0003gQ-Lr for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 16 Nov 2011 00:09:03 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RQXjx-00024w-Re for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 16 Nov 2011 00:08:58 -0500 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([140.186.70.10]:58800) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RQXjx-00024s-Oz for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 16 Nov 2011 00:08:53 -0500 Original-Received: from [155.69.18.219] (port=47211 helo=furball) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RQXjw-00059U-LU; Wed, 16 Nov 2011 00:08:53 -0500 In-Reply-To: <87y5vhs04e.fsf@mail.jurta.org> (Juri Linkov's message of "Tue, 15 Nov 2011 20:37:21 +0200") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.0.91 (gnu/linux) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 3) X-Received-From: 140.186.70.10 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:146051 Archived-At: Juri Linkov writes: >>> An alternative term might be window-combination-max-size. >> >> It would be a better name. Can't you think of a similar term which >> doesn't imply a numerical value? > > `window-combination-constraint'. Such a general name could define any > restrictions: `t' to always create a new internal window; a number > to limit the number of children; even a predicate function when necessary. > This also will reduce the diversity of window terminology by removing > the term `window nest' in favor of `window combination'. Good idea, but I think `window-combination-limit' fits existing Emacs terminology better. We could let a value of `t' have the binary window tree behavior for now, and defer numerical values for post-release.