From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Stefan Monnier Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: [PATCH] window.el: Improve mark management Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2012 15:31:25 -0500 Message-ID: References: <87zkdjtr4v.fsf@Apollo.jerryland.fr> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1327437314 9365 80.91.229.12 (24 Jan 2012 20:35:14 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2012 20:35:14 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: =?iso-8859-1?Q?J=E9r=E9my?= Compostella Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Jan 24 21:35:08 2012 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@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 1Rpn57-0006dd-Hl for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 24 Jan 2012 21:35:05 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:43836 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Rpn1i-000612-EJ for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 24 Jan 2012 15:31:34 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]:33159) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Rpn1e-00060D-Sd for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 24 Jan 2012 15:31:31 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Rpn1d-0004Xn-DP for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 24 Jan 2012 15:31:30 -0500 Original-Received: from pruche.dit.umontreal.ca ([132.204.246.22]:54968) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Rpn1d-0004Xi-3y for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 24 Jan 2012 15:31:29 -0500 Original-Received: from faina.iro.umontreal.ca (lechon.iro.umontreal.ca [132.204.27.242]) by pruche.dit.umontreal.ca (8.14.1/8.14.1) with ESMTP id q0OKVQd8002076; Tue, 24 Jan 2012 15:31:26 -0500 Original-Received: by faina.iro.umontreal.ca (Postfix, from userid 20848) id 0C19EB4431; Tue, 24 Jan 2012 15:31:26 -0500 (EST) In-Reply-To: (=?iso-8859-1?Q?=22J=E9r=E9my?= Compostella"'s message of "Sat, 21 Jan 2012 15:36:21 +0100") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.0.92 (gnu/linux) X-NAI-Spam-Flag: NO X-NAI-Spam-Threshold: 5 X-NAI-Spam-Score: 0 X-NAI-Spam-Rules: 1 Rules triggered RV4111=0 X-NAI-Spam-Version: 2.2.0.9309 : core <4111> : streams <722676> : uri <1053006> X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. X-Received-From: 132.204.246.22 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:147890 Archived-At: >> >> I'm not completely sure. The current code doesn't seem that bad since, >> >> as you say, it basically reproduces the behavior of >> >> window-configurations. >> >> So I'd like to first hear of what are concrete cases where the current >> >> behavior is a problem. >> > It's very simple : with the current code, when you call the >> > `window-state-put' function, the mark is restored as active. >> That's easy to fix: use (set-marker (mark-marker)) instead of set-mark. > Interesting. It's actually a trivial bug-fix. >> > - Either, remove all the mark stuff from `window-state-get' and >> > `window-state-put' functions. >> That's not a bad idea, actually. > Yes that's was my first idea in fact. After this discussion I think > it's the good thing to do and ou I attached the corresponding patch to > this email. `window-state-get' and `window-state-put' should not deal > with mark as it's not relevant at all and leads to an unexpected > behavior from user point of view. I tend to agree. Martin, what do you think? Stefan