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: Tabbed buffers Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2008 16:32:37 -0500 Message-ID: References: <18330.23354.579245.68671@kahikatea.snap.net.nz> <87ejc5sf4l.fsf@catnip.gol.com> <18330.29609.396872.678539@kahikatea.snap.net.nz> <87wspxqwjv.fsf@catnip.gol.com> <87myqq5p2o.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> Reply-To: rms@gnu.org NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15 X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1201556116 11317 80.91.229.12 (28 Jan 2008 21:35:16 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2008 21:35:16 +0000 (UTC) Cc: nickrob@snap.net.nz, eliz@gnu.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org, monnier@iro.umontreal.ca, miles@gnu.org To: "Stephen J. Turnbull" Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Jan 28 22:35:36 2008 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 4.50) id 1JJbdg-0003gi-3i for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 28 Jan 2008 22:35:36 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JJbdF-000721-65 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 28 Jan 2008 16:35:09 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1JJbao-0005mp-Va for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 28 Jan 2008 16:32:39 -0500 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1JJbao-0005mM-BX for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 28 Jan 2008 16:32:38 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JJbao-0005mA-0L for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 28 Jan 2008 16:32:38 -0500 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([140.186.70.10]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1JJban-0007ds-Nq for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 28 Jan 2008 16:32:37 -0500 Original-Received: from rms by fencepost.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.67) (envelope-from ) id 1JJban-0003WI-7h; Mon, 28 Jan 2008 16:32:37 -0500 In-reply-to: <87myqq5p2o.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> (stephen@xemacs.org) X-detected-kernel: by monty-python.gnu.org: Linux 2.6, seldom 2.4 (older, 4) 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:87730 Archived-At: > All I was pointing out was that if we introduce frame-level > tabs, then it might make sense to treat the current > "multiple-frames on a single tty" as tabs rather than as > frames. > > That seems like an unnecessary complication with no benefit. The benefit is that the tabs provide a visual cue (which many users will have experience with) of what alternatives are available via `next-tab' or `pop-to-tab'. That benefit comes from having the feature of tabs. I think it is a good idea to add that feature. But you are talking about something else: to treat the current "multiple-frames on a single tty" as tabs rather than as frames. That has nothing to do with the benefits tabs provide, and I don't see how it would provide any benefit. It would just create an unnecessary loss of parallelism between the tty case and the graphical display case, right? Perhaps you should state your proposal more concretely and precisely.