From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Andrii Kolomoiets Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Stop frames stealing eachothers' minibuffers! Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2020 00:43:13 +0200 Message-ID: References: <20201031194419.GC5887@ACM> <834kmago8m.fsf@gnu.org> <20201031203914.GD5887@ACM> <835z6ogc1h.fsf@gnu.org> <20201101195313.GA6190@ACM> <83sg9rd6cp.fsf@gnu.org> <20201102185147.GC7297@ACM> <83mtzzd0s3.fsf@gnu.org> <20201103210853.GA21923@ACM> <83ft5pax2p.fsf@gnu.org> <20201104173954.GA14535@ACM> <83v9ed3nbw.fsf@gnu.org> <83pn4l1327.fsf@gnu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="39014"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/28.0.50 (darwin) Cc: enometh@meer.net, monnier@iro.umontreal.ca, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Tue Nov 10 23:45:30 2020 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 1kccOH-000A19-AK for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Tue, 10 Nov 2020 23:45:29 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:33390 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kccOG-0007na-DG for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Tue, 10 Nov 2020 17:45:28 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:41670) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kccMD-0007D2-EZ for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 10 Nov 2020 17:43:26 -0500 Original-Received: from mail-lj1-x234.google.com ([2a00:1450:4864:20::234]:39885) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kccMA-0007oV-DN; Tue, 10 Nov 2020 17:43:21 -0500 Original-Received: by mail-lj1-x234.google.com with SMTP id o24so9970542ljj.6; Tue, 10 Nov 2020 14:43:17 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=from:to:cc:subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id :user-agent:mime-version; bh=o5Rs2Ne9CRVhP9J4IBzVVba/T17lgspun7yLOzE3ePM=; b=khuUuO2A83yY3ZHOYXK5xGHYesS+uhntQOb7Kld0dHBc5hBXFt9B7AVu1ikL8dsvlc gz9BySUOLD0ELBX/uXIlqpDRD6Pdf6GBo0VklS3Y2cPBsbh7OECZYzCwlVR+tsByZF2T 8wUvwZySXmZvCu2il/Qq7UbxzpzwQS9PrbCJUoV3fdywwgcEji89Ju1PB5wFY3XyLKS+ zriMDQViUDhUhH2G8Cqu+vDQsJQHP3jbcrtHYZr1XyGBi1ACY0HGZZqSWugMj5dOuzew UfcZWicxM6Vf5ZGqL263RC5lTjBhT3Le+LrKSJTnxSyLaTd6g5nmVOIxO4EYf6aG5b4v CNqw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:references:date:in-reply-to :message-id:user-agent:mime-version; bh=o5Rs2Ne9CRVhP9J4IBzVVba/T17lgspun7yLOzE3ePM=; b=h1GSbFuIQSG8LQM4CrJgRGiJH2HyXGLsvQqmr1FQ7my6MJdLMPXtdaohflLkiYODjC 6vJ/t0AbOBE2mynxwWicMZzoIa2Xuacp+eABR2W8a81T4ZwgdXwN8mz8iJ94nomGscDO fyE1goSJynVQHBzUgkP2aB2Fx92iqwE/MJbcb1bJSngxYvSS2ZeEyRiKjaqCiIPd2ogK Et8jJvEh1O/CP5prqGB+sxVEzA0fwy+iIP3pyhZd6syM0IIj5sbDi/n/S4xFh6L5WbLN cipxgI9NvA+e4uzoyrVrrbyTUq0+PIea0zrTlAw7deFFKZg0LAN28aeHYkTt+G0FeMbS GePQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532I0cS8Vn9pqZIbNUoSUt/Bo7bPT1Mj0mhDy9bF6Fgp1YZQM9Xa haUXrM4PvKOtZZ0YGXfrzX2o2wwSd2eDag== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxPzuGJ8nnmlmp0DBk/8RULeOK4+NePugNrPkbbiPf7PZvLgJvvhzXGmoOxnFJlUcLN4azMVw== X-Received: by 2002:a2e:b602:: with SMTP id r2mr8715319ljn.106.1605048195777; Tue, 10 Nov 2020 14:43:15 -0800 (PST) Original-Received: from muffinmac ([91.206.110.192]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id r22sm7458ljd.111.2020.11.10.14.43.14 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Tue, 10 Nov 2020 14:43:14 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <83pn4l1327.fsf@gnu.org> (Eli Zaretskii's message of "Tue, 10 Nov 2020 20:26:08 +0200") Received-SPF: pass client-ip=2a00:1450:4864:20::234; envelope-from=andreyk.mad@gmail.com; helo=mail-lj1-x234.google.com X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: No matching host in p0f cache. That's all we know. X-Spam_score_int: -20 X-Spam_score: -2.1 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.1 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, 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:258997 Archived-At: Eli Zaretskii writes: >>>> Does anyone else think this is common usage, to have a minibuffer-only frame >>>> while other frames also have minibuffers? >>> >>> FWIW, I've never seen it in the wild (I've seen mixes of frames with >>> and without minibuffers, but when there is a minibuffer-only frame >>> never seen it accompanied with other frames-with-minibuffer, except for >>> frames on other terminals). >> >> I don't sure what the "in the wild" means, but I know at least two >> packages that shows minibuffer-only child frame on reading user input: > > I didn't ask if this was possible, or used, I asked if such usage is > common. I don't think such usage is common nowadays. Maybe someday it would sound like "minibuffer-only frame while other frames have echo areas" and then it would be more commonly used IMO. > It is clear that we cannot find a default that will fit all > the uses, but we should have the default that works well in common use > cases. Totally agree. Just thought that the existing behavior is common enough. Don't you the think new behavior may be confusing? The old behavior was like "Oh, I left the minibuffer in that frame; OK, I need to switch to that frame and complete the task". And the new one is like "Oh, the minibuffer is on active frame, cool! But wait, where is the results of my eval?" because in 'emacs -Q': C-x 5 b foo RET bar M-: (buffer-string) C-x 5 o C-x o RET Seems like the 'buffer-string' is evaluated in the *scratch* buffer, but it is not.