Re: Functions transpose/rotate/flip windows

[martin rudalics]

>> I tried this recipe from the new node (info "(elisp) Changing Window 
Layouts"):
>>
>>> With a prefix argument and window B selected, window A would have
>>> remained unaffected and the layout would have changed as follows:
>>>
>>>           ___________       ___________
>>>          |           |     |           |
>>>          |     A     |     |     A     |
>>>          |___________| --> |___________|
>>>          |     |     |     |     |     |
>>>          |  B  |  C  |     |  C  |  B  |
>>>          |_____|_____|     |_____|_____|
>>
>> But I get a different layout:
>>
>>             ___________       ___________
>>            |           |     |           |
>>            |     A     |     |     A     |
>>            |___________| --> |___________|
>>            |     |     |     |_____B____ |
>>            |  B  |  C  |     |__________ |
>>            |_____|_____|     |_____C_____|
>
> Same with me, I think you should move this to rotate-windows.

Maybe I'll do.  I removed it for the moment.

>>> -- Command: rotate-windows &optional window reverse
>>>      This rotate windows under WINDOW in cyclic ordering.  The optional
>>>      argument REVERSE means to rotate windows backward, in reverse
>>>      cyclic order.
>>>
>>>            ___________        ___________
>>>          |           |      |           |
>>>          |     A     |      |     B     |
>>>          |___________| -->  |___________|
>>>          |     |     |      |     |     |
>>>          |  B  |  C  |      |  C  |  A  |
>>>          |_____|_____|      |_____|_____|
>>
>> I agree that 'rotate-windows' should rotate clockwise
>> as documented here.  But the current implementation
>> rotates counterclockwise.
>
> The current implimentation is direction agonistic
>
> Here is another instance of rotate-windows:
>
>     +-------+--------+            +--------+---------+
>     |       |    B   |            |        |     A   |
>     |    A  +--------+  ------>   |     C  +---------+
>     |       |    C   |            |        |     B   |
>     +-------+--------+            +--------+---------+
>
> Here, I think what's happening could be considered clockwise.  Where in
> the other example, it couldn't.

I need an example with the same initial layout and two different
outcomes.  Otherwise, the examples are meaningless.

martin