[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: |
Tue, 21 Jul 2009 19:25:06 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Thunderbird 2.0.0.21 (Windows/20090302) |
> I agree with Miles here: it's a non-starter. If you want other reasons
> for it, think about the difficulties we face already with timing issues
> in requests for resizing/moving frames and/or controlling focus of newly
> created frames. We have lots and lots of bugs there, most of which are
> a nightmare to fix because we're at the mercy of the WM.
I agree with you and Miles that WM interaction is problematic. But if
we don't use frames then IMHO framelets, tear-off windows and multiple
tool and/or menubars are non-starters too. And here we apparently
disagree.
>> In three steps: (1) save a frame's window configuration, (2) tear off a
>> window from that frame and re-purpose it into another frame, (3) restore
>> the window configuration saved in step (1). Gets you two windows with
>> the same identity. No fun here, no fun at all ...
>
> I think such window-configurations shouldn't save window identities.
`current-window-configuration' combined with `set-window-configuration'
does preserve window identities.
> Especially if one wants to be able to restore one window-configuration in
> a different frame (and/or save that config into a file).
These would have to become different functions anyway and would always
have to create a new window.
> In other words, I think that the issue of window-identity w.r.t
> window-configurations is one where there's no way to win. I think the
> least breakage will happen when we give up on preserving those
> identities.
We currently do not have any problems with window identities. So why
introduce problems by trying to preserve a window's identity when
tearing it off?
martin
- Re: Infrastructural complexity., (continued)
- Re: Infrastructural complexity., Miles Bader, 2009/07/20
- Re: Infrastructural complexity., martin rudalics, 2009/07/20
- Re: Infrastructural complexity., Miles Bader, 2009/07/20
- Re: Infrastructural complexity., Lennart Borgman, 2009/07/20
- Re: Infrastructural complexity., Thomas Lord, 2009/07/20
- Re: Infrastructural complexity., martin rudalics, 2009/07/21
- Re: Infrastructural complexity., Miles Bader, 2009/07/21
- Re: Infrastructural complexity., martin rudalics, 2009/07/21
- Re: Infrastructural complexity., Stefan Monnier, 2009/07/21
- Re: Infrastructural complexity., Thomas Lord, 2009/07/21
- Re: Infrastructural complexity.,
martin rudalics <=
- Re: Infrastructural complexity., Stefan Monnier, 2009/07/22
- Re: Infrastructural complexity., martin rudalics, 2009/07/22
- Re: Infrastructural complexity., Stefan Monnier, 2009/07/22
- Re: Infrastructural complexity., martin rudalics, 2009/07/23
- Re: Infrastructural complexity., Stefan Monnier, 2009/07/23
- Re: Infrastructural complexity., Lennart Borgman, 2009/07/23
- Re: Infrastructural complexity., martin rudalics, 2009/07/23
- Re: Infrastructural complexity., Thomas Lord, 2009/07/23
- Re: Infrastructural complexity., joakim, 2009/07/23
- Re: Infrastructural complexity., Stefan Monnier, 2009/07/23