From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Chong Yidong Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#10955: 24.0.94; Closing Speedbar frame raises error Date: Sat, 10 Mar 2012 15:50:42 +0800 Message-ID: <87d38knbcd.fsf@gnu.org> References: <871up6kn8c.fsf@escher.home> <4F562EF1.8060701@gmx.at> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1331365892 23619 80.91.229.3 (10 Mar 2012 07:51:32 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 10 Mar 2012 07:51:32 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Stephen Berman , 10955@debbugs.gnu.org To: martin rudalics Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Mar 10 08:51:31 2012 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1S6H5N-0003yW-Nc for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Sat, 10 Mar 2012 08:51:29 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:37577 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1S6H5N-0007NN-7C for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Sat, 10 Mar 2012 02:51:29 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:58894) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1S6H5K-0007My-Et for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 10 Mar 2012 02:51:27 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1S6H5I-0007kk-Mu for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 10 Mar 2012 02:51:26 -0500 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.43]:34988) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1S6H5I-0007ke-Jy for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 10 Mar 2012 02:51:24 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1S6HXx-0003jx-KK for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 10 Mar 2012 03:21:01 -0500 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Chong Yidong Original-Sender: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Sat, 10 Mar 2012 08:21:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 10955 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: Original-Received: via spool by 10955-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B10955.133136764314342 (code B ref 10955); Sat, 10 Mar 2012 08:21:01 +0000 Original-Received: (at 10955) by debbugs.gnu.org; 10 Mar 2012 08:20:43 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:41818 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1S6HXe-0003jG-1D for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 10 Mar 2012 03:20:43 -0500 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([208.118.235.10]:46480) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1S6HXS-0003iy-FI for 10955@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 10 Mar 2012 03:20:41 -0500 Original-Received: from bb116-14-103-36.singnet.com.sg ([116.14.103.36]:54978 helo=ulysses) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1S6H4k-0007l2-KZ; Sat, 10 Mar 2012 02:50:51 -0500 In-Reply-To: <4F562EF1.8060701@gmx.at> (martin rudalics's message of "Tue, 06 Mar 2012 16:36:17 +0100") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.0.94 (gnu/linux) X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 Precedence: list X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 2) X-Received-From: 140.186.70.43 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-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.bugs:57628 Archived-At: martin rudalics writes: > So this code makes it impossible to delete an invisible (or iconified) > frame if it's selected and there is only one other visible frame. The > attached patch should fix this but I'm not very sure whether it's > correct. Thanks for the analysis, Martin. Judging by the comments in other_visible_frames, the logic was basically out of date in assuming the selected frame can't be invisible. I checked in a slightly more aggressive rewrite that clears this up.