From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Richard Stallman Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: [rudalics@gmx.at: Re: [simon.marshall@misys.com: mouse-autoselect-window needs a de lay]] Date: Mon, 04 Sep 2006 13:18:56 -0400 Message-ID: References: <854pvpym4i.fsf@lola.goethe.zz> <44FBEEFC.3040205@gmx.at> Reply-To: rms@gnu.org NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15 X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1157390463 8348 80.91.229.2 (4 Sep 2006 17:21:03 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 4 Sep 2006 17:21:03 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Sep 04 19:21:02 2006 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GKI7s-0001pW-Hi for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 04 Sep 2006 19:20:48 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GKI7r-0002TO-UU for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 04 Sep 2006 13:20:47 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1GKI66-0001ip-Ix for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 04 Sep 2006 13:18:58 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1GKI65-0001iV-Vr for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 04 Sep 2006 13:18:58 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GKI65-0001iN-Q7 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 04 Sep 2006 13:18:57 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.164] (helo=fencepost.gnu.org) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.52) id 1GKIGe-0007gH-Ni for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 04 Sep 2006 13:29:52 -0400 Original-Received: from rms by fencepost.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.34) id 1GKI64-0000Hm-J1; Mon, 04 Sep 2006 13:18:56 -0400 Original-To: martin rudalics In-reply-to: <44FBEEFC.3040205@gmx.at> (message from martin rudalics on Mon, 04 Sep 2006 11:16:44 +0200) 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:59326 Archived-At: > The right fix, in my opinion, would be lazy focus > change: only when a keyboard or mouse event occurs in the new window, > is the focus changed. That has the disadvantage that the user may be > surprised by the change since the old window appears to have focus > before typing a key. That could be added. But it would violate the principle of least surprise. In my experience, the `mode-line-inactive' face and the `cursor-in-non-selected-windows' option handle feedback pretty well. I really dislike that approach. > In order to mitigate the surprise, it might be reasonable to visibly > unfocus the old window (by the different highlighting of the mode line > and the different cursor type), but not refocus a different window > before an event occurs. That would be disconcerting, IMHO. Also, I don't see how it would help. > A more radical approach would be to move toolbar and menubar just > above the currently selected window. This would also require less > mouse movement, but would likely earn us an award for the most weird > user interface look ever. I recall someone proposing the use of popup menus instead. There's also the possibility to access the menubar via F10 or the ALT key. However, clients of `mouse-autoselect-window' are probably inclined to access the menubar with the mouse too. We can't consider making such complex changes now, and I think they would be really hard, so I doubt we should consider them later either. That's what I thought before I started implementing this. Currently, I use a value of -0.5, that is, wait for about a second after I started moving the mouse and select the other window iff the mouse doesn't move any more. So far I didn't notice any confusion with these settings. I want to proceed with this approach, so I ask people to study this patch in detail.