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: desktop-restore-frames Date: Mon, 29 Jul 2013 14:11:42 +0200 Message-ID: <51F65BFE.2090805@gmx.at> References: <51F61FAB.1000401@gmx.at> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1375099934 26995 80.91.229.3 (29 Jul 2013 12:12:14 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 29 Jul 2013 12:12:14 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Emacs developers To: Juanma Barranquero Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Jul 29 14:12:15 2013 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1V3mJ6-0008E7-JF for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 29 Jul 2013 14:12:08 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:47803 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1V3mJ6-0002Pq-4v for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 29 Jul 2013 08:12:08 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:50478) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1V3mIw-0002PF-7b for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 29 Jul 2013 08:12:05 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1V3mIo-0007tF-Sl for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 29 Jul 2013 08:11:58 -0400 Original-Received: from mout.gmx.net ([212.227.15.18]:58477) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1V3mIo-0007sg-IS for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 29 Jul 2013 08:11:50 -0400 Original-Received: from [62.47.47.108] ([62.47.47.108]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx002) with ESMTPA (Nemesis) id 0MI5JG-1V4Jjf1xXi-003rbD for ; Mon, 29 Jul 2013 14:11:49 +0200 In-Reply-To: X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:yRr97QA6xOVxhd3J5si1ZnL0tkyid5vuL3zzcXXK49kUCd0BHpU QHxXwY+LY472QG13fVHs1y7UvPMa3H7RC/IbR8/xir4xFLYC7PhfeyfhfG5+HjyKPfr2HKi Z8+hUOxRrXrbVvl8k7KB0wvIZBg4ig+lGQ03HuTscRaps5WEXvTIsNaMtb18oBLAA2YsFDJ dNPaRXOj/fKj8l7gsMIHQ== X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.4.x-2.6.x [generic] X-Received-From: 212.227.15.18 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:162243 Archived-At: > Well, yes, sure (one, or two if using a minibufferless / > minibuffer-only setup). But my point is that desktop-clear allows the > user to set up buffers s/he doesn't want to "clear", so perhaps it > makes sense todo the same with frames. OTOH, perhaps not, and just > going for the easy kill-them-all, Simon de Monfort's style. Every buffer must have a name. Naming frames is less convenient so I'd use the kill-them-all approach. >> I suppose we want to make sure the window selected when saving should be >> selected after restoring (unless it's a minibuffer window). > > Yes. So the selected frame is that window's frame. >> It has the advantage that we can save "something like" registered frame >> configurations to disk and read them back. > > That, and also that it restores "dead" frames. Which is a considerably advantage. martin