From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Noam Postavsky Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#32825: 27.0.50; Deterministic window management Date: Sun, 30 Sep 2018 09:04:46 -0400 Message-ID: <874le7nnkh.fsf@gmail.com> References: <874leeaiah.fsf@mail.linkov.net> <5BA9E3B1.9010700@gmx.at> <87bm8lzrfb.fsf@web.de> <5BAA76CF.8010808@gmx.at> <878t3nublx.fsf@mail.linkov.net> <5BAD2521.7080507@gmx.at> <87sh1u38p0.fsf@mail.linkov.net> <5BB0828A.3010801@gmx.at> <87wor3b4cx.fsf@web.de> <5BB0BFF0.2050700@gmx.at> <877ej3np30.fsf@gmail.com> <5BB0C4F7.709@gmx.at> NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1538312589 29858 195.159.176.226 (30 Sep 2018 13:03:09 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 30 Sep 2018 13:03:09 +0000 (UTC) User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.1 (gnu/linux) Cc: Michael Heerdegen , 32825@debbugs.gnu.org, Juri Linkov To: martin rudalics Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sun Sep 30 15:03:05 2018 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1g6bNJ-0007gG-7Q for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Sun, 30 Sep 2018 15:03:05 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:55366 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1g6bPP-0000dx-EI for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Sun, 30 Sep 2018 09:05:15 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:60173) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1g6bPJ-0000ds-1L for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 30 Sep 2018 09:05:09 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1g6bPF-0007p3-1p for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 30 Sep 2018 09:05:08 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.43]:55271) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1g6bPE-0007ot-KY for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 30 Sep 2018 09:05:04 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1g6bPE-0001xv-6i for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 30 Sep 2018 09:05:04 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Noam Postavsky Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Sun, 30 Sep 2018 13:05:04 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 32825 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: Original-Received: via spool by 32825-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B32825.15383126967538 (code B ref 32825); Sun, 30 Sep 2018 13:05:04 +0000 Original-Received: (at 32825) by debbugs.gnu.org; 30 Sep 2018 13:04:56 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:59529 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1g6bP6-0001xW-2R for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 30 Sep 2018 09:04:56 -0400 Original-Received: from mail-io1-f44.google.com ([209.85.166.44]:41358) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1g6bP3-0001xI-Gu for 32825@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 30 Sep 2018 09:04:53 -0400 Original-Received: by mail-io1-f44.google.com with SMTP id q4-v6so7345756iob.8 for <32825@debbugs.gnu.org>; Sun, 30 Sep 2018 06:04:53 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=from:to:cc:subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id :user-agent:mime-version; bh=U7EjpQdkFai8ZHX/CXJR6Xgo2/X1bRnqFvXjlDyn6rs=; b=ZQkoxwBpf3D94O9T0tpk4BCxzJ3j/X2R3GVlZyheaNa5X4ukrq5ScI9dJ4cASLs/mV 3H1B4trB9/uUQSbKrzUGLYP8LubDtsGzXQTVsQ+4W/+8p3UCOO7kALCV3qGp86MfXu84 JptyhhjK5lg22yQ7tiLU5sLsYlrqN2R3aO8/aX5enymwwLp2wZd9yAOplqzM/PgsDh3S R0QCWMp+35ZDVsQj10elv1591C1Nxh0B40h8QzGFuWeigf7Bxuvl3o5bpGBgsRaw0M2t nbuFOoRxFtL0m1ZKYUGyf6zBIJH7dYGJK6Fn24q2SWwEgglGwXOchM18iQyqk+b5uZJk 732A== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:references:date:in-reply-to :message-id:user-agent:mime-version; bh=U7EjpQdkFai8ZHX/CXJR6Xgo2/X1bRnqFvXjlDyn6rs=; b=pVubWcLsaECpnoJOnYax1ILSnYTf0m68MD9ihEE0Mfc+dU7EjuI6uGjlZGPCgkWLeA 9qrgmsGoh5GBwL5iZg6VtDhO6k+Jxm+6Pvp0oACzps2THlhqbKKm6Z/OOMviS9ODyG6K L04N6S71HrirRBw+8VGdawl5LsLDXXqtMXoceSRFCCDxj15yyx9tco2BDxTwXN36qrJZ GJsXZLyzSAioScklm/2juvSzuZSJuTlaaXQNIRLEi1m5nFq/GFMdExSrgRZzXls/bGGX x1eV9CdLmSsyS1WU08cEyPF/bb7646edElMkDBhxFpyn4UlOpLJvXnNNp3vml5CePFeW 5QFg== X-Gm-Message-State: ABuFfoib9343MGjidhdLAv0VCB6RqjOmWVj1Sr8OXuh1xbD3xsippXD/ KljIVTjZmnbcSv5908zIpuU= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ACcGV62GGCfccZOi+0C4rhWn/QsMpAcuPxG5ZVJw/mlk/laXAxFbEwjwFDWFkZlIRcDVG7KbrbnehA== X-Received: by 2002:a6b:7b0b:: with SMTP id l11-v6mr2979433iop.9.1538312688127; Sun, 30 Sep 2018 06:04:48 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: from zebian (cbl-45-2-119-34.yyz.frontiernetworks.ca. [45.2.119.34]) by smtp.googlemail.com with ESMTPSA id 6-v6sm1847792itw.3.2018.09.30.06.04.47 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-CHACHA20-POLY1305 bits=256/256); Sun, 30 Sep 2018 06:04:47 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <5BB0C4F7.709@gmx.at> (martin rudalics's message of "Sun, 30 Sep 2018 14:43:35 +0200") X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 208.118.235.43 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.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "bug-gnu-emacs" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.bugs:150810 Archived-At: martin rudalics writes: >> I thought the simpler fix was just to reset the >> variable after the debugger goes away, but the alternate suggestion >> there of checking the visibility could probably work too. > > Wouldn't we have to check that the window is not another frame in > order to avoid Bug#17882? Oh, yes, I suppose so. A check soley for visibility would only address the "especially annoying when I happen to work in another frame, on another desktop" scenario. I don't usually have mutiple frames visible so I didn't think of it.