From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Stefan Monnier Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Stop frames stealing eachothers' minibuffers! Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2020 08:21:10 -0500 Message-ID: References: <20201031194419.GC5887@ACM> <834kmago8m.fsf@gnu.org> <20201031203914.GD5887@ACM> <835z6ogc1h.fsf@gnu.org> <20201101195313.GA6190@ACM> <83sg9rd6cp.fsf@gnu.org> <20201102185147.GC7297@ACM> <83mtzzd0s3.fsf@gnu.org> <20201103210853.GA21923@ACM> <83ft5pax2p.fsf@gnu.org> <20201104173954.GA14535@ACM> <83v9ed3nbw.fsf@gnu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="37669"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/28.0.50 (gnu/linux) Cc: enometh@meer.net, Andrii Kolomoiets , emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Tue Nov 10 14:23:12 2020 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1kcTc7-0009fS-KB for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Tue, 10 Nov 2020 14:23:11 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:43432 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kcTc6-0000R7-MH for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Tue, 10 Nov 2020 08:23:10 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:48610) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kcTaM-0007yW-BO for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 10 Nov 2020 08:21:22 -0500 Original-Received: from mailscanner.iro.umontreal.ca ([132.204.25.50]:18833) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kcTaG-0007G0-Mb; Tue, 10 Nov 2020 08:21:21 -0500 Original-Received: from pmg3.iro.umontreal.ca (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pmg3.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 436AC440F49; Tue, 10 Nov 2020 08:21:14 -0500 (EST) Original-Received: from mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (unknown [172.31.2.1]) by pmg3.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 0EDAD440CBF; Tue, 10 Nov 2020 08:21:13 -0500 (EST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=iro.umontreal.ca; s=mail; t=1605014473; bh=ZRNfn97l0TAEAzVUhWkGbxIbr58Vor0rELjmAG7VENw=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:References:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=LzukjAYhKoylZ6IJUSjZUbx370qLjbxWLdmgaXWnKPp1QAuWe6IdgHUjS1RS7GSV3 vAQ2qTNy6hHwWxZe8huk4D2iI5fAofE7JC+OEixxU8AwxUAVKFdK0opnSBq4Ts8PMM XC5MVyDitOHlmZZVGGzqrZSzLWDXiqqFr5Q+0Q9kMHYGmn5ygljvuceXpqXdv04zpw HgWsmtszKGpSn3l5iQwHDC2CHC/JkVMdb3F1pUl65Uv4/SacEGY3ePCDVTc+nno+yw e/IfIzeIP9145L5SmqF4NGeq2laPB/ecCLM25RBw4owzUEnmItgah2Zc23zZI4h57V WMxKVUa7hL0CQ== Original-Received: from alfajor (unknown [157.52.9.240]) by mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 8BE121202AA; Tue, 10 Nov 2020 08:21:12 -0500 (EST) In-Reply-To: (Eli Zaretskii's message of "Tue, 10 Nov 2020 10:52:21 +0200") Received-SPF: pass client-ip=132.204.25.50; envelope-from=monnier@iro.umontreal.ca; helo=mailscanner.iro.umontreal.ca X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: First seen = 2020/11/10 08:14:12 X-ACL-Warn: Detected OS = Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Spam_score_int: -42 X-Spam_score: -4.3 X-Spam_bar: ---- X-Spam_report: (-4.3 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 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-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:258973 Archived-At: > Does anyone else think this is common usage, to have a minibuffer-only frame > while other frames also have minibuffers? FWIW, I've never seen it in the wild (I've seen mixes of frames with and without minibuffers, but when there is a minibuffer-only frame never seen it accompanied with other frames-with-minibuffer, except for frames on other terminals). Stefan