From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: "Final" version of tty child frames Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2024 08:30:31 +0200 Message-ID: <86h6791khk.fsf@gnu.org> References: <m2h694lp7s.fsf@gmail.com> <86wmi0g0x6.fsf@gnu.org> <11a86987cce9fe0a257c3fa58703dc33@finder.org> <86wmgl6jzv.fsf@gnu.org> <092cb755eee3a9b5e06d15c0b07e90b1@finder.org> <276414b03c24964aaeb9e43e8dba5e77@finder.org> <m2y10mr6pk.fsf@gmail.com> <5fedec86bce470555814acbdf999f99d@finder.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="667"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: gerd.moellmann@gmail.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org, rudalics@gmx.at To: Jared Finder <jared@finder.org> Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Thu Dec 12 07:31:38 2024 Return-path: <emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org> Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@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 <emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org>) id 1tLcjZ-000AZY-UQ for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Thu, 12 Dec 2024 07:31:38 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from <emacs-devel-bounces@gnu.org>) id 1tLcig-0004FW-Dg; Thu, 12 Dec 2024 01:30:42 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from <eliz@gnu.org>) id 1tLcie-0004F5-40 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 12 Dec 2024 01:30:41 -0500 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from <eliz@gnu.org>) id 1tLcic-0002QY-2l; Thu, 12 Dec 2024 01:30:38 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gnu.org; s=fencepost-gnu-org; h=MIME-version:References:Subject:In-Reply-To:To:From: Date; bh=+Bappxl45/mtNni1Z/HPE0hLRX5iqhfsxc/Tn9PMSFw=; b=GQWsPn3yeJjtrrWgfcjE lUnzh4bsfodVjhgw1lAK2Y2SVEU/fShsxm1E3sUwn/NaLxd0CV/GJ6dD7NuL99UoSwgG9UxUy0kRP ppyGjCy/PtWBRtpL948QjOIJKefztOO+FtCdcSwobr38cXQXDf7cO0qfcHmvpuC74u9VoAgfT1XU0 YBQJosSWm5qQPzrS11DFYVhrMHoPMwdMBwuhafu/UDAUtUresgbfvW0L6dMm6T3uRSk4XGyfYCo/B aAcr2Va9JXpTfZMS4ZUmd9HkZ0nfUdNaqOxsT4ipOoZ+/fLPBH6v+KrT2U6etF5318v3NzHQSBZfX czG5Frv/7N6PEA==; In-Reply-To: <5fedec86bce470555814acbdf999f99d@finder.org> (message from Jared Finder on Thu, 12 Dec 2024 00:11:01 -0500) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." <emacs-devel.gnu.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/options/emacs-devel>, <mailto:emacs-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel> List-Post: <mailto:emacs-devel@gnu.org> List-Help: <mailto:emacs-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-devel>, <mailto:emacs-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=subscribe> Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:326405 Archived-At: <http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel/326405> > Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2024 00:11:01 -0500 > From: Jared Finder <jared@finder.org> > Cc: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>, emacs-devel@gnu.org, rudalics@gmx.at > > I think it would be good for unimplemented features to communicate that > state to the user so users know clearly what is going on. Right now the > error a user sees is "Can’t change the ‘minibuffer’ parameter of this > frame". Wouldn't it be better to have make-terminal-frame (a brand new > function with no existing clients to support) error with something like > "Minibuffer only frames are not supported in terminals"? I think minibuffer-only frames _are_ implemented on TTYs (albeit not very useful there). They are not implemented as child frames, I think. But yes, emitting an explicit error message about something not implemented would be definitely better.