From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: John Yates Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Emacs as WM Date: Fri, 8 Aug 2014 16:51:51 -0400 Message-ID: References: NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=089e015385ece7745e0500245f02 X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1407531133 960 80.91.229.3 (8 Aug 2014 20:52:13 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 8 Aug 2014 20:52:13 +0000 (UTC) Cc: "emacs-devel@gnu.org" To: Matthew Plant Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Aug 08 22:52:07 2014 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 1XFr8r-0008DW-DM for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 08 Aug 2014 22:52:01 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:53073 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XFr8q-0008TB-Vp for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 08 Aug 2014 16:52:00 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:47862) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XFr8m-0008Sb-F7 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 08 Aug 2014 16:51:57 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XFr8i-0003gg-D9 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 08 Aug 2014 16:51:56 -0400 Original-Received: from mail-yh0-x22a.google.com ([2607:f8b0:4002:c01::22a]:60679) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XFr8i-0003gG-7E for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 08 Aug 2014 16:51:52 -0400 Original-Received: by mail-yh0-f42.google.com with SMTP id a41so4530100yho.1 for ; Fri, 08 Aug 2014 13:51:51 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject :from:to:cc:content-type; bh=3Tk0J7QZGsrnd17fRo6hDI/pJAqT7E8uNT/fIN05HiE=; b=qDDkt/06pLe1379vVtVTrBmikK0e08MCEM+RtamAIgsHuVGyKVFSjrhQnijxGp9+W1 bgg6NVaSzxjzy07qOkLrgnFCPub+6stDZrd09Zy3EeoO1Z2yZCQcYNBIU9NOZNRXcuO8 PuYe2/f9Nik4g/IxEKIirC7ebujoflxBzA0PqDR3ICeo6m2MAuDqXJYM51XM7nWVs3gQ SW3+nixZv6OE27m4KfXjKWDhuu4CFHPdAmMMhx3eB7Oa9s1/swxDu9+yRifU6vbVGuiX gH8atY9huhLiunG+fP+//39L+Z5oMwwpjtqvABmCsqev/Ju7kseiU+JRETAk44TYL65G PaYA== X-Received: by 10.236.21.193 with SMTP id r41mr6479336yhr.179.1407531111378; Fri, 08 Aug 2014 13:51:51 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: by 10.170.124.81 with HTTP; Fri, 8 Aug 2014 13:51:51 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: X-Google-Sender-Auth: 47ItwuiEkd0oW8n7miWvzeAMsqQ X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Error: Malformed IPv6 address (bad octet value). X-Received-From: 2607:f8b0:4002:c01::22a 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:173493 Archived-At: --089e015385ece7745e0500245f02 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Personally I regularly have the opposite itch: wanting to replace emacs's frustrating window management with an external tiling WM (in my case awesome). /john On Fri, Aug 8, 2014 at 4:35 PM, Matthew Plant wrote: > I was curious about what people on this list thought about application > embedding in Emacs. To a degree this is already supported with ansi > term, but this obviously doesn't extend to GUI applications. For those > of you familiar with Plan 9, think of how programs use the window the > terminal they're launched in; embedding GUI apps in Emacs would force > the program to run in a window owned by Emacs and fitted into a buffer. > > The reason why I bring this up is because it would be relatively easy to > do in a way that's not very platform agnostic. It's really easy to > replace the X libarary (forgive me for not using proper nomenclature; > it'd lengthen this email tenfold) window creation functions with one > that extends contol over the window. The degree of integration can be > controlled by the number of replaced functions. If drawn text wants to > be handled specially, those functions would be replaced. Some method can > be specified for switching between emacs and the application controlling > user input. > > This has some obvious advantages; for one, Emacs automatically subsumes > all editors, including more WYSIWYG editors. Not only that, but Emacs > essentially becomes a window manager, which I personally would > love. Because some apps, particular web browsers, do not always require > special handling of the keyboard, switching between regular Emacs > buffers and the special app buffers would be generally seamless. I could > imagine myself typing away in one Emacs buffer, momentarily moving to > the mouse to click throught some online doxygen in my web browser in the > buffer to the right. > > There are also a lot of disadvantages to this. For one, the applications > would be pretty buggy without some effort to re-implement X > functions. Also, my co-worker points out that this would be incongrous > with the current capabilities of Emacs, one of which is the easy > transfer of text betwixt buffers. Getting these two features to work > harmoniously would be kind of difficult; lots of wrappers to > X/Gnome/whatever text writing functions would have to be made. However, > copy and paste would work (I'm guessing) out of the box. > > I suppose it all boils down to what people want with the future of > Emacs. Personally, I would love to turn on my computer and have Emacs be > there every step of the way. I genuinely think that Emacs is a great > full interface to an OS. It is not a full OS however and never should > be, which is why I like this idea as an in-between. > > -M > > --089e015385ece7745e0500245f02 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Personally I regularly have the opposite itch: wanting to = replace emacs's frustrating window management with an external tiling W= M (in my case awesome).

/john


On Fri, Aug 8, 2014 at 4:35 PM, Matthew = Plant <maplant2@illinois.edu> wrote:
I was curious about what people on this list thought about application
embedding in Emacs. To a degree this is already supported with ansi
term, but this obviously doesn't extend to GUI applications. For those<= br> of you familiar with Plan 9, think of how programs use the window the
terminal they're launched in; embedding GUI apps in Emacs would force the program to run in a window owned by Emacs and fitted into a buffer.

The reason why I bring this up is because it would be relatively easy to do in a way that's not very platform agnostic. It's really easy to<= br> replace the X libarary (forgive me for not using proper nomenclature;
it'd lengthen this email tenfold) window creation functions with one that extends contol over the window. The degree of integration can be
controlled by the number of replaced functions. If drawn text wants to
be handled specially, those functions would be replaced. Some method can be specified for switching between emacs and the application controlling user input.

This has some obvious advantages; for one, Emacs automatically subsumes
all editors, including more WYSIWYG editors. Not only that, but Emacs
essentially becomes a window manager, which I personally would
love. Because some apps, particular web browsers, do not always require
special handling of the keyboard, switching between regular Emacs
buffers and the special app buffers would be generally seamless. I could imagine myself typing away in one Emacs buffer, momentarily moving to
the mouse to click throught some online doxygen in my web browser in the buffer to the right.

There are also a lot of disadvantages to this. For one, the applications would be pretty buggy without some effort to re-implement X
functions. Also, my co-worker points out that this would be incongrous
with the current capabilities of Emacs, one of which is the easy
transfer of text betwixt buffers. Getting these two features to work
harmoniously would be kind of difficult; lots of wrappers to
X/Gnome/whatever text writing functions would have to be made. However,
copy and paste would work (I'm guessing) out of the box.

I suppose it all boils down to what people want with the future of
Emacs. Personally, I would love to turn on my computer and have Emacs be there every step of the way. I genuinely think that Emacs is a great
full interface to an OS. It is not a full OS however and never should
be, which is why I like this idea as an in-between.

-M


--089e015385ece7745e0500245f02--