[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: test for a (really) visible frame? test if a frame is the only (real
From: |
Drew Adams |
Subject: |
RE: test for a (really) visible frame? test if a frame is the only (really visible) one? |
Date: |
Tue, 2 Mar 2010 11:32:17 -0800 |
> > 4. It is impossible to test whether a given frame is a
> > terminal frame. There is no predicate for this and no
> > frame parameter that indicates this.
>
> See `framep' (and `frame-live-p').
OK; thanks for that reminder.
But I don't think that helps with the other problems. In particular, how to
distinguish the extra, special, never seeable (but always "visible") `--daemon'
frame as such. For example, how to distinguish that from an ordinary terminal
frame, which AFAIK _will_ show if you delete the other visible frames.
It is #6 that I am really most interested in: test whether a given frame is the
sole frame visible to the eye. (#5 also, since it would presumably provide a way
to test #6.)
And the simple use case mentioned:
> Define a function to delete the selected window or, if only
> one window, the selected frame - but never delete the last
> frame visible to the eye (including when `--daemon' is used).