From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Gregory Heytings Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#51883: 29.0.50; Command to get accidentally deleted frames back Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2021 10:07:11 +0000 Message-ID: <6e657552655a4a4ceecd@heytings.org> References: <87czn1gfb1.fsf@web.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=us-ascii Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="11248"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: 51883@debbugs.gnu.org To: Richard Stallman Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Wed Nov 17 11:08:11 2021 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1mnHrP-0002fg-0z for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Wed, 17 Nov 2021 11:08:11 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:44690 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mnHrN-0000KU-Vh for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Wed, 17 Nov 2021 05:08:09 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:46890) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mnHrG-0000G8-4X for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 17 Nov 2021 05:08:02 -0500 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]:48681) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mnHrF-0007VS-Rn for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 17 Nov 2021 05:08:01 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1mnHrF-0008I7-IJ for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 17 Nov 2021 05:08:01 -0500 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Gregory Heytings Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2021 10:08:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 51883 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: patch Original-Received: via spool by 51883-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B51883.163714363431776 (code B ref 51883); Wed, 17 Nov 2021 10:08:01 +0000 Original-Received: (at 51883) by debbugs.gnu.org; 17 Nov 2021 10:07:14 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:60227 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1mnHqT-0008GQ-Sa for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 17 Nov 2021 05:07:14 -0500 Original-Received: from heytings.org ([95.142.160.155]:38398) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1mnHqS-0008GI-Sk for 51883@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 17 Nov 2021 05:07:13 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=heytings.org; s=20210101; t=1637143632; bh=6WWGSMqjtLbqplfRUUkOq5Dgllnsf/LGZy1veRaYAYc=; h=Date:From:To:cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:Message-ID:References:From; b=UTFWSZ5/KcOTJKoVaAR6pK/WkxesryE4eiSP4cx6HXucod5JwfJaWap0JCWT/JqY3 aF/D/w0QMZdpV9OGx6UUdjsb/VMiOOon6PQyX/gb99WqrsYcpGAge8eUtfNXzpu+VK pisvatz9vyhmY5Nb3EBOkslU4aZXRoH/vyfmJA0psgja0/E29/YTUF7miqDOvPx0cB swbtqbjYyn1fQ9lubyXvueDjlayC4uAIxemZtacKOLaAJDQ2/2my6y8dL5a86qqG+x /cYfcmtZpcLkz7CZeCbcscoi7B6wKEunSCR10u91i3W2sJ07gbgT1nsuZFPv4NBx64 R76KaFTB66Nsg== In-Reply-To: X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list X-BeenThere: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org List-Id: "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "bug-gnu-emacs" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.bugs:220196 Archived-At: > > The command sounds useful, but I worry about one possible problem: how > much garbage will the to-be-restored frame hold onto? Please investigate > this and see whether it is a significant issue or not. > It's not significant. The frames are not kept in memory for later possible reuse, only a description of their state (size, windows, which buffer is displayed in which window) is kept in memory, which occupies a few kilobytes for each deleted frame. That's much less than the memory used by undo, for example. Moreover that state would not be kept for all deleted frames, but only for a the most recently deleted ones.