Re: [RP] [PATCH] frame split enhancement

[Jay Belanger]

Shawn Betts <address@hidden> writes:

> Jay Belanger <address@hidden> writes:
> 
> > Ryan Yeske <address@hidden> writes:
> > 
> > ...
> > > > I was right the first time; 
> > > > split 4 1
> > > > caused all sort of problems, while
> > > > split 4/1
> > > > and friends did nothing at all.
> > > 
> > > "split 4 1" is interpreted as "split 4" which means that you want to
> > > make the current window 4 pixels tall.
> > > 
> > > It looks like the ratios must be < 1.  So split 4/1 does nothing.
> > > Also negative values have no effect on ratios.
> > 
> > Okay, good (I suppose), this isn't just a local problem
> > I'll just use the original patch for now.
> 
> Hi Jay,
> 
> I'm a little confused. 'split 4 1' ignores the second argument and
> interpretes it as 'split 4' so you get a 4 pixel tall frame. 

That was a guess by Ryan, or perhaps that is what's happening with
Ryan.  I knew something was not working for me, so when Ryan mentioned
that, I didn't think too much about it; I thought perhaps some frame
ended up 4 pixels high but for some reason disappeared from the bottom
of the screen.  As I think more about it, that probably isn't what's
happening to me.

> Is this what happens on your machine or does it actually mess up?

Actually, it messes up more than that.
Using the CVS sources from last week, 
split 4/1
does nothing.  However,
split 4 1
makes the bottom of my emacs disappear; no visible minibuffer.
(Other things too, I'm sure.)

> If there is no bug then why use the original patch? Is there a
> deficiency with the frame splitting in CVS?

split 4 1 
works (pretty much) with the original patch, but (for me) the frame
splitting from cvs is not working correctly.

Jay