Re: Subwindow terminology

[martin rudalics <rudalics@gmx.at>]

 > No, I'll just deal with the fallout when XEmacs needs to sync to this
 > ill-conceived mess.  Martin doesn't write anything about why history
 > of a window tree matters to Lisp programmers,

Because Martin doesn't care.

 > but instead writes many
 > things like
 >
 >     But since I apparently failed to convey the semantics of this
 >     variable in the Elisp manual, someone else will have to take care
 >     of writing such a description.
 >
 > and
 >
 >     > Why do you need to talk about subwindows at all?
 >
 >     Because I didn't give this a thought yet ;-)
 >
 > If he needs to repeat those statements at this point, y'all are up to
 > your necks in the Big Muddy.

The term subwindow was in code and documentations for many years.  If
people decide, at a certain point in time, that they don't like the term
any more, they recognize too late in what kind of Muddy they've been all
that time.

 > And reading *all* of both bugs doesn't explain why history of a window
 > tree matters, except to Martin personally because he's the one who has
 > to make sure invariants are maintained across operations on window
 > trees.  But the rest of us *using* the API are counting on him to get
 > those invariants right.

As stated repeatedly I never cared about the history of a window tree
and will not do so in the future.

 > Any place you feel a *need* to use the term "subwindow" needs more
 > thought about what you're actually doing. :-)  (Of course I have an
 > ulterior motive here, in that XEmacs uses the term "subwindow" for a
 > completely different kind of object, a "native widget", but I think
 > that sentence is nevertheless true.)

Meanwhile I removed all references to the term subwindow from code and
documentation.

martin