[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: The window-pub branch
From: |
martin rudalics |
Subject: |
Re: The window-pub branch |
Date: |
Sat, 20 Nov 2010 10:19:51 +0100 |
User-agent: |
Thunderbird 2.0.0.21 (Windows/20090302) |
> Only if the wrapper doesn't work very well. And a wrapper cannot
> work very well if it can be bypassed.
Emacs 23 buffer display is a matryoshka of wrappers. Look at how
applications set or bind all sort of customizable variables to bypass
the user.
> Anyway all I'm asking for is the OPTION to install such wrapper.
> The obvious way to bypass it is simply not to install it. But as
> long as it is installed, there should be no way to bypass it.
> Otherwise it wouldn't be an honest option.
I reinstalled `display-buffer-function' so you have one additional
layer. And the override specifier should give you a way to override
anything supplied by an application. Did you try it, by the way?
But there's still the possibility that an application binds
`display-buffer-names' to override the user. We should at least have
the byte-compiler complain.
> You speak of "Emacs" as if it were a third party in that game.
Deliberately so.
> There is nothing anywhere outside that would force it to crash
> from zero-sized windows or windows with no buffer.
It's only when I write display code that I can remove invariants like
"every window must be at least one line tall" or "every live window must
have a live buffer associated with it". When I write code for handling
windows I treat the display code as a black box (or a "third party")
with given restrictions and implied invariants. When I write code for
displaying buffers I treat the code for handling windows as a black box
with given restrictions and implied invariants.
Here I can still crash the trunk by repeatedly trying to kill *scratch*.
> Yes. Well, maybe. At this point I'm just trying to push you towards
> installing such seat and to suggest to use it in your own functions.
The functions I write at the moment should work without such seat.
Otherwise, giving one seat to the application programmer would have the
user caught between two stools.
> Of course in order to prove the fitness of an interface you'd better
> have at least two possible clients. Here is one more, if you want to:
> http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/gnu-emacs-sources/2010-05/msg00026.html
The problem with ewm.el is that it would once more hide an option like
`display-buffer-names' because it imposes its own rules on which window
to use for displaying a buffer. What would you give a user who asked
for a hook to escape the standard bevhavior of ewm?
BTW, in an earlier version of my code `display-buffer-names' did allow
the user to control reusing the four windows on top, bottom, left and
right of a frame. When I find the time I'll clean up the code and put
it back.
martin
- Re: The window-pub branch, grischka, 2010/11/18
- Re: The window-pub branch, martin rudalics, 2010/11/18
- Re: The window-pub branch, grischka, 2010/11/18
- Re: The window-pub branch, martin rudalics, 2010/11/19
- Re: The window-pub branch, grischka, 2010/11/19
- Re: The window-pub branch, martin rudalics, 2010/11/19
- Re: The window-pub branch, grischka, 2010/11/19
- Re: The window-pub branch,
martin rudalics <=
- Re: The window-pub branch, grischka, 2010/11/20
- Re: The window-pub branch, martin rudalics, 2010/11/20
- Re: The window-pub branch, grischka, 2010/11/20
- Re: The window-pub branch, martin rudalics, 2010/11/21
- Re: The window-pub branch, grischka, 2010/11/21
- Re: The window-pub branch, martin rudalics, 2010/11/21
- Re: The window-pub branch, Stefan Monnier, 2010/11/21
- Re: The window-pub branch, martin rudalics, 2010/11/22
- Re: The window-pub branch, grischka, 2010/11/22
- Re: The window-pub branch, martin rudalics, 2010/11/22