From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "Richard M. Stallman" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: completing-read (and M-x) with pop-up-framesnon-nilchangesframefocus Date: Thu, 21 Jul 2005 13:08:02 -0400 Message-ID: References: Reply-To: rms@gnu.org NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1121967616 18192 80.91.229.2 (21 Jul 2005 17:40:16 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 21 Jul 2005 17:40:16 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu Jul 21 19:39:40 2005 Return-path: Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Dvf11-0007RI-8l for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 21 Jul 2005 19:39:23 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Dvf37-000202-Ep for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 21 Jul 2005 13:41:33 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1Dveyr-0007t9-EZ for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 21 Jul 2005 13:37:11 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1Dvew8-00072E-HR for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 21 Jul 2005 13:34:23 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Dvew6-0006m9-N3 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 21 Jul 2005 13:34:18 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.164] (helo=fencepost.gnu.org) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1DvegM-0000E0-FY for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 21 Jul 2005 13:18:02 -0400 Original-Received: from rms by fencepost.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.34) id 1DveWg-0000Pk-Nd; Thu, 21 Jul 2005 13:08:02 -0400 Original-To: "Drew Adams" In-reply-to: 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:41111 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:41111 That would be great. But how would that affect a standalone minibuffer (in a separate frame)? Selecting a frame which uses that standalone minibuffer would put the active minibuffer there. --- window.c 13 jui 2005 13:58:39 -0400 1.512 +++ window.c 15 jui 2005 03:30:07 -0400 @@ -3475,7 +3475,13 @@ we need to create a new frame. */ if (pop_up_frames || last_nonminibuf_frame == 0) { + Lisp_Object w = Fselected_window (); + struct gcpro gcpro1; + GCPRO1 (w); window = Fframe_selected_window (call0 (Vpop_up_frame_function)); + if (Fwindow_live_p (w)) + Fselect_window (w, Qt); + UNGCPRO; Fset_window_buffer (window, buffer, Qnil); return display_buffer_1 (window); } It looks plausible to me. I would expect it to have no effect when the mouse position controls window manager focus, and that is what it should do, but that needs to be tested. Could someone test that?