Re: save-frame-excursion?

[Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca>]

>>> This patch makes sure that `make-frame' gives the focus back to the
>>> previously selected frame.
>>> Shall I apply this?
>> Don't know.  Here are some comments:
>> - does it work (as in "with Metacity/W32/macosx/xmonad/addyourfavoriteWMhere")?

> I don't have access to all these WM, I'm sending the patch here to get
> feedback about this.

I know, I just wanted to make it explicit, assuming other people are
following this as well.

>> - it's not clear that it does the right thing if the selected-frame
>> is not the frame with focus (basically we'd need a focussed-frame
>> function to figure it out).
> Yes, a focused-frame would be nice.

Please at least add a FIXME comment about it, and post a bug-report to
track this issue.

>> - it brings us back to this problem of "focus via activation".
>> - is x-focus-frame always defined when this code is run (i.e. can't
>> this code be run also on emacs-nox)?
> So maybe a variant of this patch should better be applied to
> make-frame-command, which handle this distinction between x/nox.

No, lower-level is better, but you may just want to wrap the call with
an (if (fboundp 'focus-frame) ...) or someting like that.  Or maybe
implement it at an even lower level (like x-create-frame).

>> - x-focus-frame should really be renamed (so as to get rid of the "x-"
>> prefix at least).
> Okay.  I can't do the job about renaming x-focus-frame and creating the
> focused-frame function so I guess my fix will wait for that.

In any case we need to test it first.  We may get away with using
selected-frame rather than focused-frame: maybe it doesn't make that
much of a difference in practice.


        Stefan