From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: martin rudalics Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Infrastructural complexity. Date: Sat, 25 Jul 2009 19:11:50 +0200 Message-ID: <4A6B3CD6.8070307@gmx.at> References: <20090712180623.GA1009@muc.de> <87ljmjl9ow.fsf@catnip.gol.com> <4A648E1D.1000007@gmx.at> <877hy3l3kj.fsf@catnip.gol.com> <4A64BF58.4030001@gmx.at> <871vobkny7.fsf@catnip.gol.com> <4A658CD2.8020504@gmx.at> <4A65C1FF.50602@gmx.at> <4A65F9F2.3060908@gmx.at> <4A672944.3080407@gmx.at> <4A682CD6.7030107@gmx.at> <4A68A099.3050501@gmx.at> <4A6970EC.7030501@gmx.at> <4A6AC834.3060802@gmx.at> 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 1248541938 1624 80.91.229.12 (25 Jul 2009 17:12:18 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 25 Jul 2009 17:12:18 +0000 (UTC) Cc: lord@emf.net, rms@gnu.org, cyd@stupidchicken.com, lennart.borgman@gmail.com, joakim@verona.se, emacs-devel@gnu.org, juri@jurta.org, acm@muc.de, drew.adams@oracle.com, miles@gnu.org To: Stefan Monnier Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Jul 25 19:12:09 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 1MUkn2-0001IR-KR for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 25 Jul 2009 19:12:09 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:36459 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1MUkn1-0004J7-Ts for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 25 Jul 2009 13:12:07 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1MUkmw-0004IC-TW for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 25 Jul 2009 13:12:02 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1MUkms-0004GU-GW for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 25 Jul 2009 13:12:02 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=52209 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1MUkms-0004GR-BC for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 25 Jul 2009 13:11:58 -0400 Original-Received: from mail.gmx.net ([213.165.64.20]:55416) by monty-python.gnu.org with smtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1MUkmr-0005un-LL for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 25 Jul 2009 13:11:58 -0400 Original-Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 25 Jul 2009 17:11:55 -0000 Original-Received: from 62-47-34-121.adsl.highway.telekom.at (EHLO [62.47.34.121]) [62.47.34.121] by mail.gmx.net (mp015) with SMTP; 25 Jul 2009 19:11:55 +0200 X-Authenticated: #14592706 X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX192JFQJtgJ2PBunxCb2EVEz2pJOrnO+c276Si79Ns 9AYu0a3H9mKRFU User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.21 (Windows/20090302) In-Reply-To: X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0 X-FuHaFi: 0.66 X-detected-operating-system: by monty-python.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. 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:113142 Archived-At: > How 'bout: bind a enlarge-window-abort-before-delete variable to > t in adjust-window-trailing-edge, and then check this variable before > deleting a window? Not really. Enlarging a window means stealing space from others and size_window might already have stolen space from windows before it tries to delete one. With a DELTA > 1 this might leave the frame in an inconsistent state. That is, a window that shall be enlarged vertically might have grown by a couple of lines but not the entire DELTA when the action must be aborted. >> Currently, `adjust-window-trailing-edge' has a bug in that it does not >> handle fixed-size windows correctly, see bug#3689. I think we need an >> `enlarge-window' function which does not delete windows but is allowed >> to resize any other windows that are not fixed-size. > > 100% agreement. Writing such a function is not entirely trivial. I suppose we'd have to run the function without actually changing anything first and, if we succeeded in not deleting any windows, apply the actual changes. martin