[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: Wed, 29 Jul 2009 11:06:00 +0200
User-agent: Thunderbird (Windows/20090302)

>> It wouldn't be too difficult to make Emacs windows only exist within
>> "attached frames" aka as frames.
> I agree that that would not be difficult.
> I think, however, that that would be a mistake
> in the design.  In every window system window
> there should be a set of Emacs windows for which
> the selected frame corresponds to the window
> system window.  If one of those Emacs windows
> is selected then minimizing the corresponding
> frame (etc.) should have its effect on the window
> system window (and by extension on any "attached
> frames").

The `window-frame' of any window would be an attached frame that has an
associated primary window aka window-system window.  Why would that be a
mistake in the design?

> The "edit area" frame should, at least from
> the perspective of elisp and interactive
> commands, be "the frame which corresponds to
> the window system window".

If the edit-area frame is an attached frame it doesn't correspond to a
window-system window.  If it's a primary frame the size of its windows
don't sum up to its size.  What am I missing?


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]