Re: Does display-buffer display the buffer or not?

[Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>]

> From: Tassilo Horn <tassilo@member.fsf.org>
> Date: Fri, 24 Dec 2010 11:22:41 +0100
> Cc: Lennart Borgman <lennart.borgman@gmail.com>,
> 	Emacs-Devel devel <emacs-devel@gnu.org>
> 
> > I never investigated whether this occurs in practice and what happens,
> > for example, on non-graphic displays.
> 
> In ttys it also creates a new frame with that buffer.  You cannot see
> that there is a new frame

You should be able to see that, by looking at the far left edge of the
mode line: there, to the left of the buffer name, you will see the
frame name, which is normally F1, F2, etc.  When a new frame is
displayed, you get Fn with n one more than the last one you saw.
Usually, you will see F2 where before that you saw F1.

> Hm, is it sensible to have multiple frames on one tty?  You can only see
> one at a time anyway...

You don't use Emacs on a TTY too much, do you? ;-)

Of course, it's sensible.  Emacs still maintains separate faces,
separate buffer lists, etc. for each frame, even though only one is
visible at a time.  So you could use each frame for a separate related
groups of tasks, e.g. develop code in one, read email in another, etc.
We have set-frame-name and select-frame-by-name to make this kind of
workflow easier, btw.