From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Juanma Barranquero Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: How to restore the layout? Date: Fri, 28 Jun 2013 14:05:32 +0200 Message-ID: References: <51C5AA68.4000204@alice.it> <51C8B2C8.4000803@gmx.at> <51C93CDB.2020301@gmx.at> <51C9C790.3020407@gmx.at> <51CA0D4C.7080204@alice.it> <51CC3E42.7020409@alice.it> <51CC4CC1.3030202@alice.it> <51CC8403.1030009@gmx.at> <51CCA56A.8000508@gmx.at> <51CD49CF.1090103@gmx.at> <2FB4C583-960C-4DA8-8B2E-29DF8D96770E@swipnet.se> <51CD6324.2040504@gmx.at> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1372421190 17034 80.91.229.3 (28 Jun 2013 12:06:30 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 28 Jun 2013 12:06:30 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Stephen Berman , Angelo Graziosi , Emacs developers , Stefan Monnier , Eli Zaretskii , =?UTF-8?Q?Jan_Dj=C3=A4rv?= , Jambunathan K To: martin rudalics Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Jun 28 14:06:31 2013 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@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 1UsXRd-0007tx-RX for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 28 Jun 2013 14:06:29 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:48330 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UsXRd-0008P7-D4 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 28 Jun 2013 08:06:29 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:53002) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UsXRY-0008Kd-6c for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 28 Jun 2013 08:06:25 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UsXRS-000266-W6 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 28 Jun 2013 08:06:24 -0400 Original-Received: from mail-ee0-x235.google.com ([2a00:1450:4013:c00::235]:52978) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UsXRO-0001wx-LI; Fri, 28 Jun 2013 08:06:14 -0400 Original-Received: by mail-ee0-f53.google.com with SMTP id c41so1001120eek.40 for ; Fri, 28 Jun 2013 05:06:13 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-type; bh=4EwbcVuaRInM6/AiV5P6zrC5MViIUrQdAq/nb1DJPbE=; b=ypaAGbnp8ORHqI67GzYiBh1C+E8MaCOtY3rZaliqKH2HtJNMheH5yVOG849igTfmJ1 NYrrRQw0vUwPARSay0yv+GOp35i/MNuDGuCb2+DsgrH1QLzlnYOprSmUhQ0IXM2ZpIZw QHCVpyxzqHKxQHWNZZB1IL3pml4kauvHA6W0Y3B/Janu9ow4HUFT0EW0dkNeb7YurSLY b5qcL6/0/1hPppvJMIRrEhNLyLfS/uDdK4z+Fm7ZyTzkpjPbQkqAY6bVX9nEepcveODy iGOI26S5MiAPsqZaaVskABDqoRilZw0t25NZ0S1oqXxl9m5T7HLrRV1b6Z+w5CW4nI78 pprA== X-Received: by 10.14.213.135 with SMTP id a7mr13202203eep.152.1372421173677; Fri, 28 Jun 2013 05:06:13 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: by 10.14.142.4 with HTTP; Fri, 28 Jun 2013 05:05:32 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <51CD6324.2040504@gmx.at> X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Error: Malformed IPv6 address (bad octet value). X-Received-From: 2a00:1450:4013:c00::235 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:161189 Archived-At: On Fri, Jun 28, 2013 at 12:19 PM, martin rudalics wrote: > Juanma already proposed to use just the default value before maximizing > the frame. Yes, I think that's the easiest way to offer a reasonable behavior. > This problem exists independently from whether we want to save prior > positions/sizes since usually we do want to at least restore the sizes > of non-maximized frames. We do not *want* to restore the sizes, we *must* restore the sizes. Otherwise, if I have a frame with lots & lots of tiny windows and I try to restore it in a default-sized frame, restoring will fail for lack of space or for trying to bypass the safe minimum width/height. And that's exactly the kind of frame I would be pretty pissed off to have to rebuild by hand because s&r failed... > And in some cases we probably should restore > the positions too - think of an attached speedbar frame. As I said in a previous message, "some cases" = "all cases" for me. If people wants to allow that to be customizable, fine, we can add such an option. J