Re: Functions transpose/rotate/flip windows

[Pranshu Sharma]

Juri Linkov <juri@linkov.net> writes:

>> Personally I prefer "_" over "-" for horizontal edges because then I
>> don't need the "+" for corners but I'll leave that to your taste.
>
> 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.

> Also:
>
>> -- 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.

-- 
Pranshu Sharma <https://p.bauherren.ovh>