[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Infrastructural complexity.
From: |
martin rudalics |
Subject: |
Re: Infrastructural complexity. |
Date: |
Sat, 25 Jul 2009 10:52:58 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Thunderbird 2.0.0.21 (Windows/20090302) |
>> The basic semantics of `window-list', namely that of returning all life
>> windows must be unchanged.
>
> I agree. That is part of why I'd like to see
> separate frames rather than window-groups.
But then we run into the problem again that most people consider
separate frames a non-starter.
> I agree with that as well but with a caveat.
> While I dislike "window groups" I think Emacs
> would benefit from the introduction of "buffer
> groups" and from a frame property that says
> which buffer group is preferred there. For example,
> one "buffer group" might be `control-panels'.
> Commands that switch buffers would be biased to,
> by default, switch only to buffers in the
> buffer group of the current frame. This is a
> generalization of the existing notion of
> "internal" buffers.
There's already some flair of this in `same-window-buffer-names' and
`same-window-regexps'. We could do similar things for window groups and
frames.
>> Frames still don't give you any means to control where `display-buffer'
>> is going to display a buffer.
>
> I don't see any problem with adding special rules
> to `display-buffer' so that it treats framelets (frames
> with a non-nil parent slot) specially. Do you?
`display-buffer' can easily _avoid_ using a specific window for
displaying a buffer. It's less good at _preferring_ a specific window
for that purpose. This should change though.
martin
- Re: Infrastructural complexity., (continued)
- AW: Infrastructural complexity., klaus.berndl, 2009/07/25
- Re: AW: Infrastructural complexity., martin rudalics, 2009/07/24
- Re: AW: Infrastructural complexity., Thomas Lord, 2009/07/24
- AW: AW: Infrastructural complexity., klaus.berndl, 2009/07/25
- Re: AW: AW: Infrastructural complexity., Miles Bader, 2009/07/25
- Re: AW: AW: Infrastructural complexity., Thomas Lord, 2009/07/25
- Re: Infrastructural complexity., martin rudalics, 2009/07/24
- Re: Infrastructural complexity., Thomas Lord, 2009/07/24
- Re: Infrastructural complexity.,
martin rudalics <=
- Re: Infrastructural complexity., Stefan Monnier, 2009/07/25
- Re: Infrastructural complexity., martin rudalics, 2009/07/25
- Re: Infrastructural complexity., Stefan Monnier, 2009/07/26
- Re: Infrastructural complexity., martin rudalics, 2009/07/26
- Re: Infrastructural complexity., Thomas Lord, 2009/07/26
- Re: Infrastructural complexity., martin rudalics, 2009/07/26
- Re: Infrastructural complexity., Thomas Lord, 2009/07/26
- Re: Infrastructural complexity., martin rudalics, 2009/07/27
- Re: Infrastructural complexity., Thomas Lord, 2009/07/27
- Re: Infrastructural complexity., martin rudalics, 2009/07/27