RE: About the 'minibuffer' frame parameter

[Drew Adams <drew.adams@oracle.com>]

>  >> Is there anyone out there who has an idea how the 'minibuffer'
>  >> parameter should be set and used?  Maybe nobody uses them any more.
>  >
>  > If by "them" you mean frame parameter `minibuffer' then yes, I use it.
>  > I create a standalone minibuffer frame, so my `minibuffer-frame-alist'
>  > has (minibuffer . only), using (setq minibuffer-frame-alist ...).
>  > And my `default-frame-alist' has (minibuffer), aka (minibuffer . nil).
>  > I do that similarly: (setq default-frame-alist...).
> 
> I know that you use stand-alone minibuffers and that you have to _set_
> the 'minibuffer' frame parameter for that.  I wanted to know how people
> _use_ that parameter after, for example, doing
> 
> (frame-parameter nil 'minibuffer)
> 
> If nobody _uses_ it then we don't have to care about it.

Dunno what you mean by "care about it".  Just what are you proposing
to change, so as to no longer "care about it"?

I have code that does things to frames, and checks whether a given
frame is a standalone minibuffer frame.  My code typically checks
whether it is just MY standalone minibuffer frame, by checking variable
`1on1-minibuffer-frame'.  But more generally such code would check
the `minibuffer' frame parameter.  I don't see why we would eliminate
that possibility.

And I believe that Juanma's frameset code carefully distinguishes
standalone minibuffer frames from others, by checking that parameter.

I think that Emacs users should continue to be able to test, as well
as set the `minibuffer' frame parameter.  Why shouldn't they?