From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: joakim@verona.se Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Infrastructural complexity. Date: Fri, 17 Jul 2009 22:13:02 +0200 Message-ID: References: <20090712180623.GA1009@muc.de> <1247784574.6302.83.camel@dell-desktop.example.com> <1247787842.6302.90.camel@dell-desktop.example.com> <1247793496.6302.112.camel@dell-desktop.example.com> <1247797261.6302.137.camel@dell-desktop.example.com> <1247798678.6302.156.camel@dell-desktop.example.com> <87ocrjtafd.fsf@stupidchicken.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1247864277 24438 80.91.229.12 (17 Jul 2009 20:57:57 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 17 Jul 2009 20:57:57 +0000 (UTC) Cc: martin rudalics , Emacs Development To: Chong Yidong Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Jul 17 22:57:50 2009 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1MRuV3-00027R-Lj for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 17 Jul 2009 22:57:49 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:48146 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1MRuV3-0006en-1k for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 17 Jul 2009 16:57:49 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1MRtnv-0008RE-BF for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 17 Jul 2009 16:13:15 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1MRtnq-0008PI-K7 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 17 Jul 2009 16:13:14 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=52692 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1MRtnq-0008PB-Cv for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 17 Jul 2009 16:13:10 -0400 Original-Received: from iwfs.imcode.com ([82.115.149.64]:36316 helo=gate.verona.se) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1MRtnp-0006iy-Re for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 17 Jul 2009 16:13:10 -0400 Original-Received: from localhost.localdomain (IDENT:1005@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by gate.verona.se (8.13.4/8.11.4) with ESMTP id n6HKD3AU018415; Fri, 17 Jul 2009 22:13:05 +0200 In-Reply-To: <87ocrjtafd.fsf@stupidchicken.com> (Chong Yidong's message of "Fri, 17 Jul 2009 14:46:14 -0400") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.0.94 (gnu/linux) X-detected-operating-system: by monty-python.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.4-2.6 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:112642 Archived-At: Chong Yidong writes: > joakim@verona.se writes: > >> I'm not closely following this thread, but this discussion is similar to >> the "window group" proposal. There is patches in the previous threads. >> >> Basically window groups are groups of windows that behave somehwat like >> the "framelettes" discussed here. Window operations that affect other >> windows only affect the other windows in the same group as the current >> window. So, delete-other-windows, for instance, only deletes the other >> windows in the same group. > > Yes, we should add the window group feature (as well as merging CEDET). > I've been planning to look into this after the 23.1 release, but if > someone wants to work on it now, please do. > > I recall that we had an inconclusive discussion over the relative merits > of two proposals, one by Joakim that (IIRC) relied on window parameters, > and another by Martin that uses more built-in code. Does anyone have > any new thoughts about this? I thought the interface of my proposal was rather nice, but then I stumbled on some unforseen annoyances with getting some mouse operations to work, got mad and quit working on it. I'm better now and can continue working on it when I resolve my bzr issues. OTOH, if Martins proposal already works, why not use it? > -- Joakim Verona