From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Stefan Monnier Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Standard check before creating large num of frames Date: Thu, 15 Sep 2016 08:00:52 -0400 Message-ID: References: NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1473940918 27972 195.159.176.226 (15 Sep 2016 12:01:58 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 15 Sep 2016 12:01:58 +0000 (UTC) User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/25.1.50 (gnu/linux) To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu Sep 15 14:01:53 2016 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1bkVMJ-0005OX-Db for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 15 Sep 2016 14:01:39 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:34062 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bkVMH-0007vE-MJ for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 15 Sep 2016 08:01:37 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:39449) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bkVM7-0007uE-BC for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 15 Sep 2016 08:01:32 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bkVM3-00076N-A3 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 15 Sep 2016 08:01:26 -0400 Original-Received: from [195.159.176.226] (port=40847 helo=blaine.gmane.org) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bkVM3-00075U-3r for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 15 Sep 2016 08:01:23 -0400 Original-Received: from list by blaine.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1bkVLk-00029Q-JI for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 15 Sep 2016 14:01:04 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ Original-Lines: 17 Original-X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org Cancel-Lock: sha1:PLfLwk4z0eWFZNQ3ZDi/du8jfsQ= X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 195.159.176.226 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 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" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:207442 Archived-At: > several functions might create new frames. In particular when > `pop-up-frames' is non-nil, `display-buffer' creates a new frame. > Creating a lot of new frames might be expensive. > Some functions may ask for user confirmation before creating an many > frames. For instance, see `ibuffer-do-view-1': this function ask for > confirmation before creating > 3 frames. IMO, it's good if each > function creating a large number of frames do a similar check. We might > add a new option, for instance 'max-number-of-frames' or > 'frame-max-number': I get the impression that setting pop-up-frames will inevitably lead to many more frames than 3. IOW setting pop-up-frames non-nil is already a way to say that you're OK with having many frames. Stefan