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: Terminology in multi-tty primitives Date: Wed, 31 Dec 2008 17:33:37 +0900 Message-ID: <87d4f8spzy.fsf@xemacs.org> References: <87zlies8wo.fsf@xemacs.org> <87iqp0syet.fsf@xemacs.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1230712267 6603 80.91.229.12 (31 Dec 2008 08:31:07 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 31 Dec 2008 08:31:07 +0000 (UTC) Cc: cyd@stupidchicken.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org, eliz@gnu.org, rms@gnu.org To: Stefan Monnier Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Dec 31 09:32:15 2008 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 4.50) id 1LHwUw-0002Yr-Rg for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 31 Dec 2008 09:32:15 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:50596 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1LHwTi-0003mr-7n for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 31 Dec 2008 03:30:58 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1LHwTd-0003mj-GF for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 31 Dec 2008 03:30:53 -0500 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1LHwTc-0003mT-4A for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 31 Dec 2008 03:30:53 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=35111 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1LHwTc-0003mQ-0h for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 31 Dec 2008 03:30:52 -0500 Original-Received: from mtps02.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp ([130.158.97.224]:52547) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1LHwTZ-00050L-BF; Wed, 31 Dec 2008 03:30:49 -0500 Original-Received: from uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp (uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp [130.158.99.156]) by mtps02.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id B468C7FFA; Wed, 31 Dec 2008 17:30:44 +0900 (JST) Original-Received: by uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp (Postfix, from userid 1000) id DDB2511F559; Wed, 31 Dec 2008 17:33:37 +0900 (JST) In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: VM 8.0.12-devo-585 under 21.5 (beta28) "fuki" 83e35df20028+ XEmacs Lucid (x86_64-unknown-linux) X-detected-operating-system: by monty-python.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:107449 Archived-At: Stefan Monnier writes: > We all agree. What you're describing is a command: the "consistent > behavior" is user-level behavior, not Lisp-level behavior. > So we do have the suspend-frame command for that purpose. > > But we're here talking about whether such a *function* would make > sense and how. Huh? On systems where stopping a process makes sense, `suspend-emacs' does so. On other systems, it starts a subshell. Attaching "suspend emacs" semantics to a (Lisp-level) "withdraw frame" function will cause nothing but trouble, and I'm very surprised that this amount of discussion could be generated on such a premise. As far as I can see, Lisp (in general) has no need-to-know about the implementation of frames or terminals. That's entirely the province of redisplay and (because of the human penchant for imprecision) UI. The API I sketched has the bare minimum of implementation knowledge: enough to distinguish ambiguities in interpretation of terminal names.