From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Stefan Monnier via "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#67249: 30.0.50; `same-frame` equivalent for `display-buffer-alist` Date: Sat, 25 Nov 2023 09:36:05 -0500 Message-ID: References: <159cd3c2-a0c4-63e2-ebb2-ce0f5f8c343e@gmx.at> <69e6899b-9e93-9a97-a8bc-4ce9a9f0ae4c@gmx.at> <69387717-1eaa-6019-0000-4c95c61e1bc3@gmx.at> <1f026837-af56-435f-9d4e-048a18af07eb@gmx.at> <488b181f-c74e-d97b-b168-a602158c3e7b@gmx.at> <47d97021-75ea-cfc7-d439-cc38bc1044f4@gmx.at> Reply-To: Stefan Monnier Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="2142"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Cc: 67249@debbugs.gnu.org To: martin rudalics Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Sat Nov 25 15:37:23 2023 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@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 1r6tmc-0000Oa-Tq for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Sat, 25 Nov 2023 15:37:23 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1r6tmE-0005Ey-Qd; Sat, 25 Nov 2023 09:36:58 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1r6tmD-0005Eq-M4 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 25 Nov 2023 09:36:57 -0500 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:5::43]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1r6tmD-0007kt-Dy for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 25 Nov 2023 09:36:57 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1r6tmI-0001Ik-7x for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 25 Nov 2023 09:37:02 -0500 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Stefan Monnier Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Sat, 25 Nov 2023 14:37:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 67249 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs Original-Received: via spool by 67249-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B67249.17009229814938 (code B ref 67249); Sat, 25 Nov 2023 14:37:02 +0000 Original-Received: (at 67249) by debbugs.gnu.org; 25 Nov 2023 14:36:21 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:38241 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1r6tlc-0001Ha-HW for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 25 Nov 2023 09:36:20 -0500 Original-Received: from mailscanner.iro.umontreal.ca ([132.204.25.50]:33794) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1r6tla-0001HM-5f for 67249@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 25 Nov 2023 09:36:18 -0500 Original-Received: from pmg3.iro.umontreal.ca (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pmg3.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 2E729441842; Sat, 25 Nov 2023 09:36:07 -0500 (EST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=iro.umontreal.ca; s=mail; t=1700922966; bh=cqxfhG/GN67fM7+isaMiSEOA0djL9tu8kjE3Xs6bzEc=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:From; b=UZVkj++QPa62pXZoI1OJJjDgDNtHVnbEBgRpCaeYNi/nXUnaJx48H3O6QWeo/2iWQ fHtmVKWzMNys0ChqsoLvPMxaZ/aqsJBz3DrE3jlPs9q+xLrjrml98zhWTJY6NKdC1D MhXKdf9liIkPVbkavQTik328asX4tplt48bGb3foBMJctaRv+0Ll2mM1+i4pzLofmg eIm82AuT5g3bodTvxnXtOhDXZ2Nl6pULuxL/FJFV2jUuMTDnoCZRGH19EUE9/Oejfz +dFqpO/t1hz41qJ9oL6DRLejSHTSkWUbcez8BBpeZgJQwRE57MjycF8G2jbo1iAKX/ xb0KTe1GSlbgQ== Original-Received: from mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (unknown [172.31.2.1]) by pmg3.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 2F63A44170D; Sat, 25 Nov 2023 09:36:06 -0500 (EST) Original-Received: from pastel (unknown [45.72.227.120]) by mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 0C271120210; Sat, 25 Nov 2023 09:36:06 -0500 (EST) In-Reply-To: <47d97021-75ea-cfc7-d439-cc38bc1044f4@gmx.at> (martin rudalics's message of "Sat, 25 Nov 2023 10:00:40 +0100") X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list 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-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.bugs:274982 Archived-At: >> BTW, I just noticed another way to attack the problem, which is to add >> a `pop-up-frames` argument which works just like the variable but takes >> precedence over it, as in the PoC patch below (a real patch would >> adjust other places where we use that variable, among other things). >> WDYT? > Then we should probably use 'pop-up-windows' instead of > 'inhibit-same-window'. Hmm... I don't think it would quite work, because `pop-up-windows` only controls creation of new windows, whereas `inhibit-same-window` has an effect in more cases. > 'display-buffer' resembles a Cervantesque struggle of consistency > with history. Indeed. But I'm not sure how that translates into a practical choice between `pop-up-frames` and `inhibit-new-frame`. I'm leaning towards `pop-up-frames` right now because it avoids introducing a new notion. Admittedly, the notion it reuses (i.e. `pop-up-frames`) is not the cleanest around, but `inhibit-new-frame` isn't super clean either. Can someone help me choose between those two bad choices? Stefan