From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Uhm... weird frame behaviour Date: Mon, 12 Sep 2011 20:33:27 +0300 Message-ID: <83y5xtwtqw.fsf@gnu.org> 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> <87d3f5r89e.fsf@wanadoo.es> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1315848914 26349 80.91.229.12 (12 Sep 2011 17:35:14 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 12 Sep 2011 17:35:14 +0000 (UTC) Cc: rudalics@gmx.at, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: =?utf-8?Q?=C3=93scar?= Fuentes Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Sep 12 19:35:10 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 1R3APV-0002Q0-Og for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 12 Sep 2011 19:35:10 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:39626 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1R3APV-0002gC-2c for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 12 Sep 2011 13:35:09 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]:55565) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1R3APR-0002f4-TW for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 12 Sep 2011 13:35:07 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1R3APQ-0007UD-Nu for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 12 Sep 2011 13:35:05 -0400 Original-Received: from mtaout21.012.net.il ([80.179.55.169]:50687) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1R3APQ-0007SU-FB for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 12 Sep 2011 13:35:04 -0400 Original-Received: from conversion-daemon.a-mtaout21.012.net.il by a-mtaout21.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) id <0LRF00M006ZE1300@a-mtaout21.012.net.il> for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 12 Sep 2011 20:33:27 +0300 (IDT) Original-Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 ([77.126.9.62]) by a-mtaout21.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) with ESMTPA id <0LRF00LNY7FQZX80@a-mtaout21.012.net.il>; Mon, 12 Sep 2011 20:33:27 +0300 (IDT) In-reply-to: <87d3f5r89e.fsf@wanadoo.es> X-012-Sender: halo1@inter.net.il X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Solaris 10 (beta) X-Received-From: 80.179.55.169 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:143943 Archived-At: > From: =C3=93scar Fuentes > Cc: rudalics@gmx.at, emacs-devel@gnu.org > Date: Mon, 12 Sep 2011 19:16:29 +0200 >=20 > Eli Zaretskii writes: > > So Martin, I think other_visible_frames should be augmented for t= he > > fact that when IS_DAEMON is non-zero, there's one frame that is a= lways > > there and does not constitute "other frames". >=20 > It seems more correct to fix the FRAME_VISIBLE_P test for that F1 f= rame. I'm not sure. In fact, I don't understand why that function even tests frame visibility, or maybe I don't understand its contract. > So this feature about smartly deleting frames is broken for some us= e > cases. I'm sure Martin will fix whatever needs fixing. But bugs are not necessarily a valid argument against intended behavior.