From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "Stephen J. Turnbull" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Gtk tabs in emacs, new branch Date: Fri, 02 Apr 2010 21:19:59 +0900 Message-ID: <87bpe2qc5s.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> References: <4BB4CF6B.2000007@alice.it> <87wrwq4a63.fsf@siart.de> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1270210912 22348 80.91.229.12 (2 Apr 2010 12:21:52 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 2 Apr 2010 12:21:52 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Uwe Siart Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Apr 02 14:21:47 2010 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Nxfsg-0001i9-O1 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 02 Apr 2010 14:21:47 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:45522 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Nxfsg-0005iy-3x for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 02 Apr 2010 08:21:46 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1NxfrH-0005Dz-Dg for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 02 Apr 2010 08:20:19 -0400 Original-Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=42217 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1NxfrF-0005Co-Ds for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 02 Apr 2010 08:20:18 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Nxfr9-00028H-73 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 02 Apr 2010 08:20:16 -0400 Original-Received: from mtps01.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp ([130.158.97.223]:49846) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Nxfr8-00027t-Ts for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 02 Apr 2010 08:20:11 -0400 Original-Received: from uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp (uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp [130.158.99.156]) by mtps01.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id B8E471537B3; Fri, 2 Apr 2010 21:20:06 +0900 (JST) Original-Received: by uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp (Postfix, from userid 1000) id E8A0C1A38CA; Fri, 2 Apr 2010 21:19:59 +0900 (JST) In-Reply-To: <87wrwq4a63.fsf@siart.de> X-Mailer: VM 8.0.12-devo-585 under 21.5 (beta29) "garbanzo" a03421eb562b XEmacs Lucid (x86_64-unknown-linux) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6, seldom 2.4 (older, 4) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:123064 Archived-At: Uwe Siart writes: > Angelo Graziosi writes: > > > Perhaps we need something like 'M-x tabs-mode' (by default possibly! > > :-)) > > Please don't enable such stuff by default. The user should be able to > decide by himself how many frames/windows/(tabs) he would like to > open. Opening many frames or windows is annoying to me, because I invariably have too many open when I shut down for whatever reason. and they can take up a lot of screen/frame real estate. If I'm going to have tabs for 99.9% of a session though, I'm just as happy having the tabs at startup as long as the top tab is sane (typically defined as "the selected tab in the selected frame at close-and-save time"). The extra 1.5 or 2 lines of text is almost never an issue. I think this is an even better candidate for "try as default and wait for screams of pain" than delete-selection-mode. People who hate it will only have to turn it off once. Many people who might love it won't find out about it for years if it's not default. BTW, at one time I had the same intuition you do. Then XEmacs put in tabs and enabled them by default. What I discovered is that at startup, the window I was working in *last* is a very good candidate for top tab, and it's at the top of buffer-list. What surprised me is that the second-to-last window was typically not a good guess for the second most important; rather it was often buried down the list at fifth or sixth. Tabs made it quite easy to find those precisely because they're in-your-face. iswitch and friends might make that advantage quite small for most users; I don't know. On the other hand, the actual cost is *very* small if you're going to enable tabs anyway.