[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: C-x C-f in two frames -> "user minibuffer while in
From: |
David Combs |
Subject: |
Re: C-x C-f in two frames -> "user minibuffer while in |
Date: |
Sun, 3 Jul 2005 21:47:19 +0000 (UTC) |
In article <A$E7Qq1ywbQg@ludens>, Toto <bago@ludens.elte.hu> wrote:
>In article <mailman.3863.1118240186.25862.help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org>, Peter
>Dyballa <Peter_Dyballa@Web.DE> writes:
>> Am 08.06.2005 um 15:18 schrieb David Reitter:
>>
>>> If I open a second frame, then do C-x C-f in one of them and press tab
>>> so that the window is split and I get a *Completions* buffer in one
>>> frame, and when I then select the second frame and do a C-x C-f there,
>>> I don't get another *Completions* buffer there, but an error message
>>> that appears in the first frame:
>>>
>>> "Command attempted to use minibuffer while in minibuffer"
>>>
>>
>> No, that's definitely no bug! There is in the first frame minibuffer
>> waiting for your input. And since there is only one such thing, yet,
>> you can't use it for something different somewhere else.
>>
>> I think too it would be a nice enhancement if every frame would have
>> its own minibuffer. I remember that from time to time I had to use more
>> than one Emacs running to get things together for an input to
>> minibuffer (could have sorted this out in scratch buffer -- but then I
>> would have needed to remember how I made minibuffer awaiting my input
>> ...)
>
>If you set enable-recursive-minibuffers to t it works.
>(setq enable-recursive-minibuffers t)
>
>So that's definitely no bug, indeed.
>
Sounds good -- but if it were good, why isn't "on" the default?
That is, what *disadvantages* from setting it on? What bewares
of having it on?
Thanks,
David
- Re: C-x C-f in two frames -> "user minibuffer while in,
David Combs <=
Message not available