From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Thomas Lord Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Infrastructural complexity. Date: Thu, 16 Jul 2009 16:44:02 -0700 Message-ID: <1247787842.6302.90.camel@dell-desktop.example.com> References: <20090712180623.GA1009@muc.de> <0C244EB2B99349238E281268B0339C72@us.oracle.com> <20090716200959.GA4298@muc.de> <87vdlstkg4.fsf@mail.jurta.org> <87skgwb9na.fsf@stupidchicken.com> <1247784574.6302.83.camel@dell-desktop.example.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1247787869 16024 80.91.229.12 (16 Jul 2009 23:44:29 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 16 Jul 2009 23:44:29 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Chong Yidong , emacs-devel@gnu.org, Juri Linkov , Stefan Monnier , Alan Mackenzie , Drew Adams To: Lennart Borgman Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Jul 17 01:44:21 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 1MRacZ-0002m7-D9 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 17 Jul 2009 01:44:16 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:46261 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1MRacY-0001V7-B1 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 16 Jul 2009 19:44:14 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1MRacV-0001V2-5E for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 16 Jul 2009 19:44:11 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1MRacQ-0001Uq-GO for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 16 Jul 2009 19:44:10 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=49930 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1MRacQ-0001Un-De for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 16 Jul 2009 19:44:06 -0400 Original-Received: from smtp111.dfw.emailsrvr.com ([67.192.241.111]:37835) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1MRacP-0001f4-SX for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 16 Jul 2009 19:44:06 -0400 Original-Received: from relay11.relay.dfw.mlsrvr.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by relay11.relay.dfw.mlsrvr.com (SMTP Server) with ESMTP id 0464417FEA9; Thu, 16 Jul 2009 19:44:03 -0400 (EDT) Original-Received: by relay11.relay.dfw.mlsrvr.com (Authenticated sender: lord-AT-emf.net) with ESMTPSA id 0E75A17FCCE; Thu, 16 Jul 2009 19:44:01 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: Evolution 2.22.3.1 X-detected-operating-system: by monty-python.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 3) 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:112582 Archived-At: On Fri, 2009-07-17 at 00:54 +0200, Lennart Borgman wrote: > I am unable to understand the "four framelettes". Why not just let any > window be a framelette if desired? I can't imagine a clean way for that to work for two reasons. First, it would allow unbounded nesting of framelettes. Second, I don't know about you but I can't think of any semantics for window configurations that would make that work nicely. That being said, I'll observe that "any window a framelette" is easily construed as a generalization of "four fixed framelettes in the customary toolbar and panel positions" and so it is not so absurd to think of starting with the conceptually simpler "four framelettes" idea and generalizing later if clear answers appear for unbounded nesting and window configuration semantics. -t