From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Stefan Monnier Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#8865: 24.0.50; `display-buffer' does not respect `pop-up-frames' Date: Fri, 17 Jun 2011 12:21:06 -0400 Message-ID: References: <4DF7B1BB.6050704@gmx.at> <4DF87A4F.60704@gmx.at> <5F95025D0ABE4561A305F30293828F38@us.oracle.com> <4DF8DD1E.8080004@gmx.at> <68E985ED37824BE799A9C01162553E22@us.oracle.com> <4DF8EF87.8080903@gmx.at> <7923A876A42744A39EEC6AAB67362EAC@us.oracle.com> <185D134A9D484823B6473FD6B358D248@us.oracle.com> <134D56CC977B4CB289C6F019A73A5F2D@us.oracle.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1308328053 27754 80.91.229.12 (17 Jun 2011 16:27:33 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 17 Jun 2011 16:27:33 +0000 (UTC) Cc: 8865@debbugs.gnu.org To: "Drew Adams" Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Jun 17 18:27:29 2011 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([140.186.70.17]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1QXbtI-0003Nx-TA for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Fri, 17 Jun 2011 18:27:29 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:47403 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QXbtH-0000hi-Lh for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Fri, 17 Jun 2011 12:27:27 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]:43363) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QXbo6-0007m3-7D for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 17 Jun 2011 12:22:07 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QXbo3-0007EN-Gt for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 17 Jun 2011 12:22:05 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.43]:36030) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QXbo3-0007EA-6t for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 17 Jun 2011 12:22:03 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1QXbo2-00038y-Kb; Fri, 17 Jun 2011 12:22:02 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Stefan Monnier Original-Sender: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Resent-To: owner@debbugs.gnu.org Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Fri, 17 Jun 2011 16:22:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 8865 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: Original-Received: via spool by 8865-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B8865.130832767512032 (code B ref 8865); Fri, 17 Jun 2011 16:22:02 +0000 Original-Received: (at 8865) by debbugs.gnu.org; 17 Jun 2011 16:21:15 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1QXbnG-000381-Uy for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 17 Jun 2011 12:21:15 -0400 Original-Received: from ironport2-out.teksavvy.com ([206.248.154.181] helo=ironport2-out.pppoe.ca) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1QXbnF-00037o-0w for 8865@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 17 Jun 2011 12:21:13 -0400 X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: Av0EAM5++01FpZvP/2dsb2JhbABSpk94iHO/EYYnBJ1YhB8 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.65,382,1304308800"; d="scan'208";a="116536770" Original-Received: from 69-165-155-207.dsl.teksavvy.com (HELO pastel.home) ([69.165.155.207]) by ironport2-out.pppoe.ca with ESMTP/TLS/ADH-AES256-SHA; 17 Jun 2011 12:21:07 -0400 Original-Received: by pastel.home (Postfix, from userid 20848) id CB7DA59010; Fri, 17 Jun 2011 12:21:06 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: <134D56CC977B4CB289C6F019A73A5F2D@us.oracle.com> (Drew Adams's message of "Fri, 17 Jun 2011 08:08:35 -0700") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.0.50 (gnu/linux) X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.11 Precedence: list Resent-Date: Fri, 17 Jun 2011 12:22:02 -0400 X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 3) 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:47259 Archived-At: > My question was about replacing such a test. The common denominator of the > intentions behind using such tests is what all of those tests do (have in > common): distinguish nil `pop-up-frames' from non-nil. Nothing more. If that's all you want to do, then "(if pop-up-frames" is (trivially) the only answer. But I'm pretty sure that's not the answer you're looking for because I'm pretty sure that "test if pop-up-frames is non-nil" was *not* the intention behind the code. Now, it might be true that the coder doesn't know his own intention. It's a common problem. Stefan