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: Window configurations Date: Sun, 09 May 2010 17:01:47 +0200 Message-ID: <4BE6CE5B.1050703@gmx.at> References: <4BB4CF6B.2000007@alice.it> <871vdu6qn5.fsf@mail.jurta.org> <87bpcv1wvt.fsf@mail.jurta.org> <4BE13828.2030609@gmx.at> <4BE56D33.9000403@gmx.at> <4BE6C050.1000603@gmx.at> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1273417322 32252 80.91.229.12 (9 May 2010 15:02:02 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 9 May 2010 15:02:02 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Kevin Rodgers , emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Lennart Borgman Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sun May 09 17:02:00 2010 connect(): No such file or directory 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 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OB812-0000mm-7W for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 09 May 2010 17:02:00 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:44658 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1OB811-0001Vo-Jl for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 09 May 2010 11:01:59 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1OB80x-0001Vd-3X for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 09 May 2010 11:01:55 -0400 Original-Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=40133 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1OB80u-0001VO-R9 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 09 May 2010 11:01:53 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OB80t-0001ym-JY for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 09 May 2010 11:01:52 -0400 Original-Received: from mail.gmx.net ([213.165.64.20]:48407) by eggs.gnu.org with smtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OB80t-0001yN-8K for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 09 May 2010 11:01:51 -0400 Original-Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 09 May 2010 15:01:47 -0000 Original-Received: from 62-47-33-46.adsl.highway.telekom.at (EHLO [62.47.33.46]) [62.47.33.46] by mail.gmx.net (mp015) with SMTP; 09 May 2010 17:01:47 +0200 X-Authenticated: #14592706 X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX18t/3QYNuItE1ZVaUgos/Pb3RGL9s0PVDjYii/SLL QxLo/97x1fB0oL User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.21 (Windows/20090302) In-Reply-To: X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0 X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.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:124653 Archived-At: >> We could add something like that eventually. However, I suppose that >> most people would like to see the tooltip frame at the right of `point' >> in some otherwise blank space of the screen. > > Does not this very much depend on the purpose of the tooltip? Maybe. But displaying the tooltip frame right above the modeline is just my personal preference. I doubt many people will like it. >> Also, tooltips currently have quite a number of annoying features which >> must be corrected first. > > Maybe a topmost frame is not the best frame style. I > suppose "transient-for" (on w32 "owned") is better. Maybe. But first of all, the mode-line updating in `delete-frame' has to be made conditional on non-tooltip frames since currently this interacts very badly with timers. (There's also a splendid sillyness in delete_frame, apparently introduced by yours truly, which allows running hooks when they shouldn't.) But so far I don't understand why we have to always delete tooltip frames in the first place. Also, tooltip frames should be either moved or made invisible whenever frames are resized - the current behavior is intolerable in this regard. Finally, the `tooltip-show' interface should be improved to allow, for example, merging with other faces. BTW, is there any way to make tooltip frames transparent? martin