From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Drew Adams Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: RE: managing windows in two frames Date: Wed, 4 Sep 2013 14:33:32 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: References: <8561uiclrj.fsf@stephe-leake.org> <5225DB8D.6060709@gmx.at> <858uzcbggs.fsf@stephe-leake.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1378330443 25124 80.91.229.3 (4 Sep 2013 21:34:03 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 4 Sep 2013 21:34:03 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Stefan Monnier , Stephen Leake Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Sep 04 23:34:00 2013 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1VHKi4-0003eW-T2 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 04 Sep 2013 23:33:57 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:55920 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1VHKi4-0006YH-Fg for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 04 Sep 2013 17:33:56 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:57329) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1VHKht-0006XE-F4 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 04 Sep 2013 17:33:53 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1VHKhk-0003Ww-RH for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 04 Sep 2013 17:33:45 -0400 Original-Received: from userp1040.oracle.com ([156.151.31.81]:51223) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1VHKhk-0003Ws-K6 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 04 Sep 2013 17:33:36 -0400 Original-Received: from ucsinet22.oracle.com (ucsinet22.oracle.com [156.151.31.94]) by userp1040.oracle.com (Sentrion-MTA-4.3.1/Sentrion-MTA-4.3.1) with ESMTP id r84LXYrE002008 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Wed, 4 Sep 2013 21:33:35 GMT Original-Received: from aserz7021.oracle.com (aserz7021.oracle.com [141.146.126.230]) by ucsinet22.oracle.com (8.14.4+Sun/8.14.4) with ESMTP id r84LXXUd011220 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Wed, 4 Sep 2013 21:33:34 GMT Original-Received: from abhmt108.oracle.com (abhmt108.oracle.com [141.146.116.60]) by aserz7021.oracle.com (8.14.4+Sun/8.14.4) with ESMTP id r84LXXXs014623; Wed, 4 Sep 2013 21:33:33 GMT In-Reply-To: X-Priority: 3 X-Mailer: Oracle Beehive Extensions for Outlook 2.0.1.8 (707110) [OL 12.0.6680.5000 (x86)] X-Source-IP: ucsinet22.oracle.com [156.151.31.94] X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.4.x-2.6.x [generic] X-Received-From: 156.151.31.81 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 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.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:163194 Archived-At: > Make C-x 5 a prefix key which sets display-buffer-overriding-action for > the duration of the next command. >=20 > So C-x 5 C-x C-f will do the same as what you currently get with C-x 5 f > (of course, we'd also preserve a C-x 5 f binding for backward > compatibility,=20 For more than just that, no? `C-x 5 C-x C-f' is not as simple as `C-x 5 f'. Occam would grumble. Yes, Occam might be somewhat happy to eliminate the "extra" commands `*-other-window' and `*-other-frame', and just have `*'. But the devil is in the details. It's not clear, so far, whether users would find this simpler or more complicated. > and we wouldn't need find-file-other-frame any more, Do you mean only for `C-x 5 f'? Someone will likely want to bind such a command (or whatever it becomes) to additional keys, no? Sure s?he could make do with a lambda expression or whatever, if necessary. But why? (It's not clear to me just what you have in mind.) > although we'd also have to keep it for backward compatibility). For more than just that, I expect... > Of course, other such prefixes could be used, such as C-x 4. BTW, what do you do with `C-x 4 C-x 5 C-x C-f'? By your description, I guess that does the same thing as `C-x 4 f'? > And as Martin mentions, we'd want one that can say "display in current > window". That should be no harder to define than C-x 4 or C-x 5. Suppose it were `C-x 6', for kicks. Would `C-x 6 C-x 4 C-x 5 C-x C-f' then be the same as `C-x C-f'? Will you at least be keeping `C-x C-f' "for backward compatibility"? > More generally you could define such a prefix key that lets you specify > a particular window to use in the next command. Could we see a spec of some kind (better description), before the implementation and possible deprecations?