From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "Drew Adams" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: RE: Usage examples of dedicated windows and popup frames? Date: Fri, 8 Jul 2011 10:38:14 -0700 Message-ID: <198B70C8FDE848DD848627322A55D774@us.oracle.com> References: <871uy0n9ch.fsf@member.fsf.org><82B55F5AA16147EB86ACAF247643C125@us.oracle.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1310146727 28434 80.91.229.12 (8 Jul 2011 17:38:47 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 8 Jul 2011 17:38:47 +0000 (UTC) Cc: 'Tassilo Horn' , emacs-devel@gnu.org To: "'Stefan Monnier'" Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Jul 08 19:38:43 2011 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([140.186.70.17]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1QfF0k-0001eo-Sx for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 08 Jul 2011 19:38:43 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:51282 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QfF0j-0000cX-Sy for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 08 Jul 2011 13:38:41 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]:40472) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QfF0V-0000cO-6c for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 08 Jul 2011 13:38:29 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QfF0T-0002Eo-TE for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 08 Jul 2011 13:38:27 -0400 Original-Received: from acsinet15.oracle.com ([141.146.126.227]:37352) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QfF0T-0002Ee-Nc for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 08 Jul 2011 13:38:25 -0400 Original-Received: from acsinet21.oracle.com (acsinet21.oracle.com [141.146.126.237]) by acsinet15.oracle.com (Switch-3.4.4/Switch-3.4.4) with ESMTP id p68HcLem010890 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Fri, 8 Jul 2011 17:38:23 GMT Original-Received: from acsmt356.oracle.com (acsmt356.oracle.com [141.146.40.156]) by acsinet21.oracle.com (8.14.4+Sun/8.14.4) with ESMTP id p68HcLLJ002520 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Fri, 8 Jul 2011 17:38:21 GMT Original-Received: from abhmt110.oracle.com (abhmt110.oracle.com [141.146.116.62]) by acsmt356.oracle.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with ESMTP id p68HcFhv001262; Fri, 8 Jul 2011 12:38:15 -0500 Original-Received: from dradamslap1 (/10.159.32.31) by default (Oracle Beehive Gateway v4.0) with ESMTP ; Fri, 08 Jul 2011 10:38:15 -0700 X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 11 In-Reply-To: X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.6109 Thread-Index: Acw9j1+TRnJknnSqQ663fA/nVh6jhAAABeRQ X-Source-IP: acsinet21.oracle.com [141.146.126.237] X-Auth-Type: Internal IP X-CT-RefId: str=0001.0A090209.4E174090.007C:SCFMA922111,ss=1,re=-4.000,fgs=0 X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 1) X-Received-From: 141.146.126.227 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 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-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:141811 Archived-At: > >> "They" should be iconified automatically and only one > >> frame should be (re-)used for *Completions*. > > > What happens to the frame should be under _user_ control. > > At least it should be possible to choose frame deletion > > rather than iconification. > > I know, Drew. You've made your point obnoxiously clear > several times already. ... your rant. Huh? What rant? What's obnoxious about explaining the situation on Windows? You and I have discussed automatic frame iconifying in the context of Emacs bug reports involving `bury-buffer', but AFAIK automatic frame iconifying has never come up on emacs-devel (even in the context of `bury-buffer'). And although you have argued (in bug threads) that `bury-buffer' should iconify the frame, this is the first time (AFAIK) that you have stated that a *Completions* frame "should be iconified". A fortiori, it is the first time I have responded to such a proposal - anywhere, obnoxiously or otherwise. Besides, AFAIK, nowhere (neither here nor in a bug thread) have I mentioned before the second annoyance from iconifying: that of adding to the Emacs list/menu in the Windows task bar. Until now, IIRC, I have mentioned (to you, not emacs-devel) only the annoyance of the Windows iconifying animation, not the task-bar list/menu annoyance. > But here, I'm talking about "the current intended default > behavior" I see. I didn't know that was the current intended behavior for *Completions* with non-nil `pop-up-frames' (having never seen it in any Emacs version), and I didn't realize that's all you were saying. I thought you were saying that this is what you think _should_ happen in the future - a proposal as the proper fix for the problem Tassilo reported, and not just a description of the currently intended behavior. Ambiguity of English "should". When you argued that `bury-buffer' "should" hard-code iconify a dedicated frame you did mean more than just "that's what the current design is" - you argued in favor of that approach. I thought that's what you were doing here too: proposing iconifying as the solution to the *Completions* frame problem.