From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "Joe" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.help Subject: Re: Splitting window displayed in special frame Date: 29 Jan 2007 04:28:04 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Message-ID: <1170073684.920901.20240@h3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> References: <1169815266.359141.17750@l53g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <1169845176.969344.292070@l53g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1170074441 6571 80.91.229.12 (29 Jan 2007 12:40:41 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2007 12:40:41 +0000 (UTC) To: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Original-X-From: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Jan 29 13:40:35 2007 Return-path: Envelope-to: geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1HBVoH-0008TB-Rt for geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Mon, 29 Jan 2007 13:40:34 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HBVoH-0006lK-Dm for geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Mon, 29 Jan 2007 07:40:33 -0500 Original-Path: shelby.stanford.edu!newsfeed.stanford.edu!postnews.google.com!h3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail Original-Newsgroups: gnu.emacs.help Original-Lines: 52 Original-NNTP-Posting-Host: 194.174.193.16 Original-X-Trace: posting.google.com 1170073690 26594 127.0.0.1 (29 Jan 2007 12:28:10 GMT) Original-X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com Original-NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2007 12:28:10 +0000 (UTC) In-Reply-To: <1169845176.969344.292070@l53g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> User-Agent: G2/1.0 X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; de; rv:1.8.1.1) Gecko/20061204 Firefox/2.0.0.1,gzip(gfe),gzip(gfe) X-HTTP-Via: 1.1 nino:80 (squid/2.5.STABLE10) Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com Injection-Info: h3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com; posting-host=194.174.193.16; posting-account=7mp27A0AAABJmTcdtth2wDqR_uX1KOnZ Original-Xref: shelby.stanford.edu gnu.emacs.help:145121 X-BeenThere: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Users list for the GNU Emacs text editor List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.help:40726 Archived-At: On 26 Jan., 21:59, "rgb" wrote: > On Jan 26, 6:41 am, "Joe" wrote: > > > > > Hello, > > > I have set the variable special-display-buffer-names to > > (("*SQL*" (width . 139) )))) > > . > > Whenever I create a "*SQL*" buffer, it is displayed in a new frame as > > it should be. > > The only problem is that if something is happening in the mini-buffer > > that creates a (temporary) window, like completion, the buffer > > *Completions* is displayed in a different frame. > > For instance, if I do find-file and press tab to get the file > > completions list, it is displayed in another (existing) frame instead > > of splitting the window temporary as it is done for other windows. > > > I tried to set special-display-buffer-names to > > (("*SQL*" (width . 139) (unsplittable . nil)))) > > but it had no effect. > > > It should not act different for *Completions* in the special-displayed > > buffer from *Completions* of a function issued in a normal buffer. > > How can I do that? > I'ts hard to say if this is a bug or there is a good reason but > special-display-popup-frame creates the frame like this: > > (make-frame (append args special-display-frame-alist)) > > If unsplitable is non-nil in special-display-frame-alist it will > appear after your nil version - which gets supplied from args. > > Making the frame happens in C code so I can't be sure > exactly how and why but the conflict between the 2 sources > of parameters is almost certainly the cause. > If you're curious, look at x_get_arg, otherwise > you might try reporting it as a bug and see what they say. Interesting answer. Does that mean, there is currently no possibility for me to change the behaviour? I understand this: setting unsplittable is ignored because of the way the special frame is created. In that case it is definately a bug. No, I am not THAT curious. :-)