Re: C-x 2 and C-x 3

[Lluís]

Juri Linkov writes:

>> Looking at 'split-window', its argument names and documentation should be
>> changed accordingly (right now it's using the horizontal concept). The 
>> optimal
>> would probably be to pass a symbol to a `where-new' argument (e.g., 'bottom,
>> 'right, etc), but that might just be too disruptive on current code (unless 
>> some
>> backwards-compatible argument parsing code was also present).

> Your version of `split-window' is outdated.  The latest version is:

>   (split-window &optional WINDOW SIZE SIDE)
>   ...
>   Optional third argument SIDE nil (or `below') specifies that the
>   new window shall be located below WINDOW.  SIDE `above' means the
>   new window shall be located above WINDOW.
>   ...
>   SIDE t (or `right') specifies that the new window shall be
>   located on the right side of WINDOW.  SIDE `left' means the new
>   window shall be located on the left of WINDOW.

> So the most logical would be to name split functions by adding the
> `SIDE' argument to the existing base function name using a template
> "split-window-<SIDE>" thus creating new names (like Stefan already suggested):

> split-window-below
> split-window-above
> split-window-right
> split-window-left

Aaaahhh! Excelent. Then I wouldn't give it any more thought, as this is, I
think, the most consistent way to name them.


Lluis

-- 
 "And it's much the same thing with knowledge, for whenever you learn
 something new, the whole world becomes that much richer."
 -- The Princess of Pure Reason, as told by Norton Juster in The Phantom
 Tollbooth