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: Uhm... weird frame behaviour Date: Tue, 13 Sep 2011 20:27:40 +0200 Message-ID: <4E6FA09C.7000600@gmx.at> References: <4E6C80BF.2060002@gmx.at> <4E6DCB0A.4060605@gmx.at> <87mxeaar26.fsf@wanadoo.es> <4E6DFF55.3000708@gmx.at> <87ehzlnaxj.fsf@wanadoo.es> <4E6E1D4C.7030601@gmx.at> <87littrcyy.fsf@wanadoo.es> <831uvlyckf.fsf@gnu.org> <83zki9wx4u.fsf@gnu.org> <4E6E4EC7.8070901@gmx.at> <87obypvacd.fsf@stupidchicken.com> <4E6F45D3.3010105@gmx.at> <871uvkcuvr.fsf@stupidchicken.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1315938872 17793 80.91.229.12 (13 Sep 2011 18:34:32 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 13 Sep 2011 18:34:32 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Eli Zaretskii , emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Chong Yidong Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Sep 13 20:34:28 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 1R3XoS-00010O-Cz for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 13 Sep 2011 20:34:28 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:45054 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1R3XoR-0006El-Q8 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 13 Sep 2011 14:34:27 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]:47065) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1R3XoO-0006Ed-JI for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 13 Sep 2011 14:34:25 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1R3XoN-0001lY-Pm for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 13 Sep 2011 14:34:24 -0400 Original-Received: from mailout-de.gmx.net ([213.165.64.22]:48214) by eggs.gnu.org with smtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1R3XoN-0001lI-BI for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 13 Sep 2011 14:34:23 -0400 Original-Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 13 Sep 2011 18:27:42 -0000 Original-Received: from 62-47-47-86.adsl.highway.telekom.at (EHLO [62.47.47.86]) [62.47.47.86] by mail.gmx.net (mp072) with SMTP; 13 Sep 2011 20:27:42 +0200 X-Authenticated: #14592706 X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX18KA7kKlb8Kg5DZAxuXvBID0N5fxrlgxRud/wapKA CRGHlMwBUmt2A+ User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.21 (Windows/20090302) In-Reply-To: <871uvkcuvr.fsf@stupidchicken.com> X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0 X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. X-Received-From: 213.165.64.22 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:143984 Archived-At: > I've fixed this directly in window-deletable-p. Thanks. Apparently (not (eq (next-frame nil 0) (selected-frame)))) which is in `bury-buffer' should do the same. Do you see any differences? >> Then I'll revert to the previous behavior which kills the frame even if it >> has some buffer it could show instead. > > Note sure what you mean. Wouldn't that make the frame deletion even > more aggressive? Hopefully not. The drawback now is that with `pop-up-frames' non-nil doing C-h k RET M-x prev-buffer M-x next-buffer q will delete the frame although it could show the buffer shown by `prev-buffer' instead. martin