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: Sat, 12 Nov 2011 08:36:11 +0800 Message-ID: <87vcqq6utg.fsf@gnu.org> References: <87vcqqoekt.fsf@gnu.org> <4EBD6B63.4050607@gmx.at> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1321058192 27468 80.91.229.12 (12 Nov 2011 00:36:32 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 12 Nov 2011 00:36:32 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: martin rudalics Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Nov 12 01:36:28 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 1RP1a7-0007hU-Qe for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 12 Nov 2011 01:36:27 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:51952 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RP1a7-0004K5-DR for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 11 Nov 2011 19:36:27 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]:48567) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RP1a4-0004K0-Hr for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 11 Nov 2011 19:36:25 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RP1a3-0003uM-2R for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 11 Nov 2011 19:36:24 -0500 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([140.186.70.10]:37002) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RP1a3-0003uI-0y for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 11 Nov 2011 19:36:23 -0500 Original-Received: from bb116-14-110-22.singnet.com.sg ([116.14.110.22]:55578 helo=furball) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RP1a2-0001CQ-0S; Fri, 11 Nov 2011 19:36:22 -0500 In-Reply-To: <4EBD6B63.4050607@gmx.at> (martin rudalics's message of "Fri, 11 Nov 2011 19:37:23 +0100") 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:145993 Archived-At: martin rudalics writes: > Initially I didn't store that value. But binding `window-splits' to > non-nil can be useful when you want to show with one command many > buffers on the same frame like in `Buffer-menu-select'. It might be useful for arranging windows when they are initially created, for the purpose of distributing them with equal heights/widths. But it's a bit unexpected for that to "stick around" and affect subsequent window resizing/deletion commands. If the user wants that, she should just set the variable. > If you think it's not useful, I can easily restore the older version > where I just look at the value of `window-splits' > (`Buffer-menu-select' could use `balance-windows' as well). Just using the value of `window-splits' would be better, yes. Thanks. (If in the future it turns out that we need this feature for something, it would probably be better to reimplement it as a window parameter; I don't think we need a special slot for it.)