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" <bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org>
Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs
Subject: bug#67249: 30.0.50; `same-frame` equivalent for `display-buffer-alist`
Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2023 14:09:22 -0500
Message-ID: <jwvwmubrkx7.fsf-monnier+emacs@gnu.org>
References: <jwv34x4m50o.fsf@iro.umontreal.ca>
 <159cd3c2-a0c4-63e2-ebb2-ce0f5f8c343e@gmx.at>
 <jwv1qcmfm22.fsf-monnier+emacs@gnu.org>
 <cbc6a073-2718-7809-c85e-cf338341c712@gmx.at>
 <jwvv89xesho.fsf-monnier+emacs@gnu.org>
 <69e6899b-9e93-9a97-a8bc-4ce9a9f0ae4c@gmx.at>
 <jwvwmucd0mq.fsf-monnier+emacs@gnu.org>
 <69387717-1eaa-6019-0000-4c95c61e1bc3@gmx.at>
Reply-To: Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214";
	logging-data="25726"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io"
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13)
Cc: 67249@debbugs.gnu.org
To: martin rudalics <rudalics@gmx.at>
Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Tue Nov 21 20:13:28 2023
Return-path: <bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org>
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 <bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org>)
	id 1r5WBb-0006TS-7O
	for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Tue, 21 Nov 2023 20:13:27 +0100
Original-Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1)
	(envelope-from <bug-gnu-emacs-bounces@gnu.org>)
	id 1r5WBQ-0005Dh-V6; Tue, 21 Nov 2023 14:13:17 -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 <Debian-debbugs@debbugs.gnu.org>)
 id 1r5WBA-0004s9-31
 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 21 Nov 2023 14:13:01 -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 <Debian-debbugs@debbugs.gnu.org>)
 id 1r5WB9-0004kH-RT
 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 21 Nov 2023 14:12:59 -0500
Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2)
 (envelope-from <Debian-debbugs@debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1r5WBC-0003ov-6M
 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 21 Nov 2023 14:13:02 -0500
X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org
Resent-From: Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca>
Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org>
Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org
Resent-Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2023 19:13:02 +0000
Resent-Message-ID: <handler.67249.B67249.170059393914627@debbugs.gnu.org>
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=B67249.170059393914627
 (code B ref 67249); Tue, 21 Nov 2023 19:13:02 +0000
Original-Received: (at 67249) by debbugs.gnu.org; 21 Nov 2023 19:12:19 +0000
Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:57435 helo=debbugs.gnu.org)
 by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
 (envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org>)
 id 1r5WAU-0003nr-VC
 for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 21 Nov 2023 14:12:19 -0500
Original-Received: from mailscanner.iro.umontreal.ca ([132.204.25.50]:19566)
 by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
 (envelope-from <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca>) id 1r5WAS-0003nc-FH
 for 67249@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 21 Nov 2023 14:12:17 -0500
Original-Received: from pmg1.iro.umontreal.ca (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1])
 by pmg1.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id BA9751000AD;
 Tue, 21 Nov 2023 14:12:07 -0500 (EST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=iro.umontreal.ca;
 s=mail; t=1700593926;
 bh=aQCpZsYV1wvys4hnHKS3HeQkKPWEExihLnpBMk1ahI4=;
 h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:From;
 b=M22aio4ISsO/mgrM//mGhMPW+09BiGBddQBjL3h2tjp4voIPgRLhURMaKoe/elJ4A
 19bT+fr+AO1cFjuSrU/Rr1I1dpIVgO7AdbPovvnvsu8gQx+A3bE8uvurug3ONM3OdD
 7u9WpV2/SBUYN9dA1nJ+djUYmpQAHQBvfw4ZBT5U+38ocIlRxTudshO7A+gK37zWEy
 /gOPu1MB/thMMNXZffok6HcqbKr8MOHaaN3Gkuy+Ojd+RzYnHMBdUfhMD1iWkoIOVR
 +z9hUhTYX066dWP8UDsHW+KAi3jiA3RELwXaemYNm8xyiV4QIxwm7+Xs/D6XzXYKFe
 28iWG2zuX6pZg==
Original-Received: from mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (unknown [172.31.2.1])
 by pmg1.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id C564A100043;
 Tue, 21 Nov 2023 14:12:06 -0500 (EST)
Original-Received: from lechazo (lechon.iro.umontreal.ca [132.204.27.242])
 by mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id B10011202AA;
 Tue, 21 Nov 2023 14:12:06 -0500 (EST)
In-Reply-To: <69387717-1eaa-6019-0000-4c95c61e1bc3@gmx.at> (martin rudalics's
 message of "Tue, 21 Nov 2023 18:14:38 +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" <bug-gnu-emacs.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/options/bug-gnu-emacs>,
 <mailto:bug-gnu-emacs-request@gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-gnu-emacs>
List-Post: <mailto:bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:bug-gnu-emacs-request@gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-gnu-emacs>,
 <mailto:bug-gnu-emacs-request@gnu.org?subject=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:274739
Archived-At: <http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.bugs/274739>

>>> So a (same-frame . t) entry would simply auto-translate to a pair of
>>> (reusable-frames . nil) (lru-frames . nil) entries?
>>
>> [ Hmm... I'm curious how you interpreted what I wrote to reach
>>    that conclusion.  ]
>> No, I meant the opposite: the users who want to override
>> `reusable-frames` and `lru-frames` need to add all three
>>
>>      (same-frame . t)
>>      (reusable-frames . nil)
>>      (lru-frames . nil)
>
> Suppose an application calls =E2=80=98display-buffer=E2=80=99 with a non-=
nil
> 'same-frame' alist entry.  If we want an existing action function to
> obey that entry and we do not want to rewrite that function, we could
> have 'display-buffer' add a (reusable-frames . nil) (lru-frames . nil)
> pair to the alist.

We could, but we could also define the semantics of `same-frame` to have
no effect on frame re-use (it would actually be closer to the current
semantics).  If so, it'd be best to find another name for it along the
lines of "no-new-frame".

>>> We could add a 'display-buffer--same-frame-action' variable.
>> I don't really know what that suggestion means.
>> The `--` suggests it'd be some internal detail of `window.el` whereas
>> I thought we're discussing the externally visible API and semantics.
> It could do what I meant above - translate 'same-frame' internally.

What is "it"?  `display-buffer--same-frame-action`?
Without knowing where you'd use such a variable, it's hard for me to
guess what you mean by that.

>> I don't see why you think it'd require any change in existing code: the
>> ones who set `same-frame` get what they ask for.
> You already would change the existing 'display-buffer-pop-up-frame'.
> If you think that change is sufficient, I will obviously stop thinking.

I suspect it might be sufficient, but it would deserve a better name so
users don't get the wrong impression that it will affect reuse on
other frames.

So you think the patch I sent is actually more-or-less acceptable
(modulo documentation and finding a better name)?

>> I'm not talking about `display-buffer` choosing a minibuffer-only frame.
>> I'm saying that when the selected-frame is a minibuffer-only frame, it's=
 OK
>> to ignore the `same-frame` request.
> When the selected frame is a minibuffer-only frame, 'display-buffer'
> usually tries to think of 'last-nonminibuffer-frame' as the selected
> frame.  So probably 'same-frame' should do the same.

Sounds like this is compatible to my suggestion that it's OK to ignore
`same-frame` when the selected frame is a minibuffer-only frame.

> But all I can do is to hint at inconsistencies in your proposal.

Not sure what's the inconsistency there.


        Stefan