From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Alan Mackenzie Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Stop frames stealing eachothers' minibuffers! Date: Thu, 18 Mar 2021 16:58:25 +0000 Message-ID: References: <87pn02ojwu.fsf@miha-pc> <875z1tfn0p.fsf@miha-pc> <83czvxd079.fsf@gnu.org> <83blbhcz41.fsf@gnu.org> <83sg4sbs6w.fsf@gnu.org> <694e12db-a19c-31f8-077c-62d32b640eb9@gmx.at> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="21664"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: Eli Zaretskii , monnier@iro.umontreal.ca, jakanakaevangeli@chiru.no, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: martin rudalics Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Thu Mar 18 18:21:23 2021 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1lMwKp-0005VB-6E for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Thu, 18 Mar 2021 18:21:23 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:54000 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lMwKo-00023e-6i for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Thu, 18 Mar 2021 13:21:22 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:39282) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lMvyh-0001B9-Rs for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 18 Mar 2021 12:58:31 -0400 Original-Received: from colin.muc.de ([193.149.48.1]:31034 helo=mail.muc.de) by eggs.gnu.org with smtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lMvyf-0003Z8-1Y for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 18 Mar 2021 12:58:31 -0400 Original-Received: (qmail 73741 invoked by uid 3782); 18 Mar 2021 16:58:26 -0000 Original-Received: from acm.muc.de (p4fe15597.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [79.225.85.151]) (using STARTTLS) by colin.muc.de (tmda-ofmipd) with ESMTP; Thu, 18 Mar 2021 17:58:26 +0100 Original-Received: (qmail 22926 invoked by uid 1000); 18 Mar 2021 16:58:25 -0000 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <694e12db-a19c-31f8-077c-62d32b640eb9@gmx.at> X-Submission-Agent: TMDA/1.3.x (Ph3nix) X-Primary-Address: acm@muc.de Received-SPF: pass client-ip=193.149.48.1; envelope-from=acm@muc.de; helo=mail.muc.de X-Spam_score_int: -18 X-Spam_score: -1.9 X-Spam_bar: - X-Spam_report: (-1.9 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 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-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:266576 Archived-At: Hello, Martin and Eli. On Thu, Mar 18, 2021 at 16:51:32 +0100, martin rudalics wrote: > >> The problem that Miha highlighted is that when there is an open > >> minibuffer when that last frame is deleted, that open minibuffer remains > >> in existence, fouling up the next emacsclient session. > >> > >> Maybe such open minibuffers should just be aborted (along with any other > >> recursive edits) when the last frame gets deleted. This would be > >> simpler to code than preserving those minibuffers somewhere, and > >> restoring them at the next emacsclient session. Aborting them also > >> seems more natural, since their contents are unlikely to have any > >> relevance to the next emacsclient session. > > > > Martin, can you comment on this, please? > What about answering questions about unsaved buffers, running processes > ... in such a situation? I never use emacsclient so I have no idea how > this should behave in practice. I don't use emacsclient either. But questions about unsaved buffers seem to prevent Emacs terminating until they get answered. The same for running processes (at least, for gdb). > But any non-crucial dialog should be aborted IMHO. Are the any uses of the minibuffer which count as crucial, in this sense? > martin -- Alan Mackenzie (Nuremberg, Germany).