Re: New balance-windows

[Lennart Borgman]

Pascal Bourguignon wrote:

> Note that:
>
>        +------+------+
>        |      |      |
>        |      |      |
>        +------+------+
>        |      |      |
>        |      |      |
>        +------+------+
>
> may represent two different structures: C-x 2 C-x 3 C-x o C-x 3
> or C-x 3 C-x 2 C-x o C-x 2
>
>
> But in both these cases:
>
>        +-------+--------+             +-------+--------+
>        |       |        |             |       |        |
>        | 1 / 3 |        |             |       | 1 / 4  |
>        |       |        |             | 1 / 2 +--------+
>        +-------|  2 / 3 |             |       |        |
>        |       |        |             |       | 1 / 4  |
>        | 1 / 3 |        |             +-------+--------+
>        |       |        |             |                |
>        +-------+--------+             |                |
>        |                |             |     1 / 2      |
>        |     1 / 3      |             |                |
>        |                |             |                |
>        +-------+--------+             +-------+--------+
>
> the hierarchy of splits is the same, so I don't see why it should
> balance differently.
>
> I think a correct algorithm should recover the split tree, then make
> the balancing depending on the window counts in subtrees.
>  
Is the problem really that welldefined in Emacs? Do you know how the 
windows have been splitted? The difference above may perhaps be seen as 
emerging from that difficulty?