[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Infrastructural complexity.
From: |
Thomas Lord |
Subject: |
Re: Infrastructural complexity. |
Date: |
Thu, 23 Jul 2009 11:51:23 -0700 |
On Thu, 2009-07-23 at 11:24 +0200, martin rudalics wrote:
> > Did I misunderstand something?
>
> Not at all. Only window groups are guaranteed to form rectangles. I
> never claimed that the remaining windows would add up to a rectangle.
> And obviously you can't retrieve the remaining windows by calling
> `window-list'. You can subtract the windows in a window group from the
> windows returned by `window-list' to get the "remaining" windows.
That's a fine example of how window-groups
are not quite the right concept here.
I understand you to say that `window-list'
should (by default) return all of the windows,
grouped or not. That won't DTRT in the use
cases of greatest interest - where "groups"
are supposed to be control panels around an
edit area. Just the windows in the edit area
should be returned by default.
That is, it seems to me - and yes this is
necessarily just an opinion about user
interfaces - that the edit area windows
should behave exactly like a traditional
Emacs frame. For example, C-x o navigates
(normally) just among the edit area windows.
Normal splitting or deleting of a window changes
only edit area windows. Programs that look for,
say, a largest window to use to pop up some
buffer should look only to the edit area (unless
explicitly written to do otherwise). It should
take a special gesture (keystroke or mouse, different
from C-x o) to select a window in a control panel
and, once its selected the set of windows in that
control panel are then the focus (the C-x o ring,
etc.).
Emacs already has a way to segregate groups of
windows in that way: frames. That's what
gives rise to the idea that control panels are
mostly just a new way to render certain frames.
-t
- Re: Infrastructural complexity., (continued)
- Re: Infrastructural complexity., Thomas Lord, 2009/07/21
- Re: Infrastructural complexity., martin rudalics, 2009/07/21
- Re: Infrastructural complexity., Thomas Lord, 2009/07/21
- Re: Infrastructural complexity., martin rudalics, 2009/07/22
- Re: Infrastructural complexity., Thomas Lord, 2009/07/22
- Re: Infrastructural complexity., martin rudalics, 2009/07/22
- Re: Infrastructural complexity., Thomas Lord, 2009/07/22
- Re: Infrastructural complexity., martin rudalics, 2009/07/23
- Re: Infrastructural complexity.,
Thomas Lord <=
- Re: Infrastructural complexity., joakim, 2009/07/23
- Re: Infrastructural complexity., Lennart Borgman, 2009/07/23
- Re: Infrastructural complexity., joakim, 2009/07/23
- Re: Infrastructural complexity., Stefan Monnier, 2009/07/23
- Re: Infrastructural complexity., Thomas Lord, 2009/07/23
- Re: Infrastructural complexity., martin rudalics, 2009/07/24
- Re: Infrastructural complexity., Lennart Borgman, 2009/07/24
- Re: Infrastructural complexity., martin rudalics, 2009/07/24
- Re: Infrastructural complexity., Lennart Borgman, 2009/07/24
- Re: Infrastructural complexity., martin rudalics, 2009/07/24