From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: MON KEY Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: display-buffer-reuse-frames default to t Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2011 13:48:26 -0500 Message-ID: NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1295462930 31757 80.91.229.12 (19 Jan 2011 18:48:50 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2011 18:48:50 +0000 (UTC) Cc: martin rudalics , Eli Zaretskii , Andreas Schwab , Stefan Monnier To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Jan 19 19:48:44 2011 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Pfd5D-0004Nn-2L for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 19 Jan 2011 19:48:39 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:36329 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Pfd5C-0006Bc-Fo for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 19 Jan 2011 13:48:38 -0500 Original-Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=52056 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Pfd53-00069z-QD for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 19 Jan 2011 13:48:31 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Pfd52-0000Iu-K1 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 19 Jan 2011 13:48:29 -0500 Original-Received: from mail-yw0-f41.google.com ([209.85.213.41]:48751) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Pfd52-0000IO-HZ; Wed, 19 Jan 2011 13:48:28 -0500 Original-Received: by ywj3 with SMTP id 3so472151ywj.0 for ; Wed, 19 Jan 2011 10:48:26 -0800 (PST) Original-Received: by 10.216.184.139 with SMTP id s11mr2877391wem.13.1295462906180; Wed, 19 Jan 2011 10:48:26 -0800 (PST) Original-Received: by 10.216.70.212 with HTTP; Wed, 19 Jan 2011 10:48:26 -0800 (PST) X-Google-Sender-Auth: J5MKzCqQ-HdA-DjDUo7pTYlReAY X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 2) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:134767 Archived-At: >>> Any objection to defaulting display-buffer-reuse-framesto t? >> >> Does it restrict itself to visible frames? > > No. It can use iconified frames. > > Ideally, one would set this to 0, 'visible, or t and get the desired > effect. That's what I do on my branch. Is the suggestion to extend the range of acceptable values for `display-buffer-reuse-frames'? IMHO there is opportunity here for some much needed changes[1]. Indeed, it would make more sense to extend the range of values allowed to any one of: { t nil 0 visible } I would also suggest adding `selected-frame' as an option for consistency with `display-buffer's provision for a "specific frame" as argument to its FRAME parameter. Such change would require changing the custom type declaration of `display-buffer-reuse-frames' from: :type 'boolean ;; Is the declaration even correct now? Likewise, if such change(s) are made _please_ ensure that the variable's docstring indicate explicitly the range of possible values and their affect on frame/buffer display, i.e. don't just punt to `display-buffer' with a "which see". Maybe, better is to implement an additional/alternative variable: `display-buffer-reuse-frames-if-graphic' which inherits its defaults according to `display-buffer-reuse-frames' and `pop-up-frames'? As it is now, the current docstring of `display-buffer-reuse-frames' is poorly specified wrt to the interaction of `display-buffer' around `pop-up-frames' and `display-graphic-p'. Likely many users are left with an essentially opaque customization option which often fails to DTRT esp. where third-party authors using `display-buffer' in an ill adapted position to appropriately accomodate user display customizations, cf the recent report bug 7728: (URL `http://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=7728') and discussion of `save-window-excursion' beginning around msg 68: (URL `http://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=7728#68') [1] I use a two-head display with xrandr (and in the past with the equivalent on w32 a three-head display) and rarely have less than two frames open across these displays In both environments the behaviour of `display-buffer-reuse-frames'/`display-buffer' has many weird/odd corner cases wrt to the "strongly dedicated" and often commands do not do what I would expect. The cummulative effect of these corner cases is that I usually give up trying to figure out where/why/how certain buffers/windows/frames will be displayed and just adapt to the funky. -- /s_P\