From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "Lennart Borgman (gmail)" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel,gmane.emacs.pretest.bugs Subject: Re: display-buffer-other-frame - useful? doc string? Date: Mon, 07 Apr 2008 18:44:11 +0200 Message-ID: <47FA4F5B.1050708@gmail.com> References: <002401c8820f$7d6042c0$0600a8c0@us.oracle.com><000001c8977b$146abc10$0200a8c0@us.oracle.com><000001c897bb$26e5ebe0$0200a8c0@us.oracle.com><001901c8984d$5a62fe80$0200a8c0@us.oracle.com> <000301c898ca$704e8930$c2b22382@us.oracle.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1207586809 31647 80.91.229.12 (7 Apr 2008 16:46:49 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 7 Apr 2008 16:46:49 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-pretest-bug@gnu.org, 'Stefan Monnier' To: Drew Adams Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Apr 07 18:47:21 2008 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 1JiuUl-0008Q5-Jw for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 07 Apr 2008 18:46:59 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JiuU8-00079h-Be for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 07 Apr 2008 12:46:20 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1JiuSR-0004oo-2z for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 07 Apr 2008 12:44:35 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1JiuSO-0004k5-47 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 07 Apr 2008 12:44:34 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JiuSN-0004jY-P1 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 07 Apr 2008 12:44:31 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([140.186.70.10]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1JiuSN-0000yW-CJ for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 07 Apr 2008 12:44:31 -0400 Original-Received: from mail.gnu.org ([199.232.76.166] helo=mx10.gnu.org) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.67) (envelope-from ) id 1JiuSM-0002Ta-Ow for emacs-pretest-bug@gnu.org; Mon, 07 Apr 2008 12:44:30 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by monty-python.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1JiuSJ-0000xF-2L for emacs-pretest-bug@gnu.org; Mon, 07 Apr 2008 12:44:30 -0400 Original-Received: from ch-smtp02.sth.basefarm.net ([80.76.149.213]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1JiuSI-0000x0-LL for emacs-pretest-bug@gnu.org; Mon, 07 Apr 2008 12:44:26 -0400 Original-Received: from c83-254-150-27.bredband.comhem.se ([83.254.150.27]:62379 helo=[127.0.0.1]) by ch-smtp02.sth.basefarm.net with esmtp (Exim 4.68) (envelope-from ) id 1JiuSF-0007uI-8O; Mon, 07 Apr 2008 18:44:23 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.8.1.9) Gecko/20071031 Thunderbird/2.0.0.9 Mnenhy/0.7.5.666 In-Reply-To: <000301c898ca$704e8930$c2b22382@us.oracle.com> X-Antivirus: avast! (VPS 080407-1, 2008-04-07), Outbound message X-Antivirus-Status: Clean X-Originating-IP: 83.254.150.27 X-Scan-Result: No virus found in message 1JiuSF-0007uI-8O. X-Scan-Signature: ch-smtp02.sth.basefarm.net 1JiuSF-0007uI-8O d21aff1cbb64506c55d4bf30abe21bdd X-detected-kernel: by monty-python.gnu.org: Linux 2.6? (barebone, rare!) X-detected-kernel: by monty-python.gnu.org: Linux 2.6, seldom 2.4 (older, 4) 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:94593 gmane.emacs.pretest.bugs:21924 Archived-At: Drew Adams wrote: >> Hmm... so now we need to figure out whyh my code works differently >> from your. Maybe it's just a silly bug in my code, but maybe there's >> something deeper. >> >>> Perhaps someone else on Windows can try it also, to confirm, but >>> that's what I see. >> I believe you. > > I believe me too, but I can make mistakes. It would be good if someone would > confirm this behavior on Windows, before we try to fix problems that might not > exist. Can you give us some code to test?