[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
bug#7533: 24.0.50; `dired-mark-pop-up': delete frame afterwards if `pop-
From: |
martin rudalics |
Subject: |
bug#7533: 24.0.50; `dired-mark-pop-up': delete frame afterwards if `pop-up-frames' |
Date: |
Fri, 06 Apr 2012 18:56:31 +0200 |
> In sum, your patch (or mine), plus `delete-frame' as the value of
> `frame-auto-hide-function', is adequate.
IIUC your patch works regardless of the value of
`frame-auto-hide-function'. The problem of your patch is that in
(if (one-window-p) (delete-frame) (delete-window))
the window for showing the buffer may have been _reused_ in which case
deleting is certainly the wrong solution.
> For emacs -Q:
>
> Without my fix and with your patch the frame is iconified, without changing
> `frame-auto-hide-function'.
>
> Without my fix and with your patch the frame is deleted, if
> `frame-auto-hide-function' is `delete-frame'.
That's what this option has been meant for. I can't judge what it
should default to because I hardly ever use multiple frames and never
use `dired'.
> My point was that users should not have to customize this option just to fix
> this regression. It is reasonable for a user to prefer iconifying for frames
> that s?he wants to keep, but still, naturally, want this frame to be deleted,
as
> it has no reason for being anymore.
We can consider adding a third value for `frame-auto-hide-function'.
> If you were not averse to binding a user option for a local use, perhaps you
> could just bind `frame-auto-hide-function' to `delete-frame' for the duration
of
> the command. That should DTRT, and such a temporary binding should not bother
> anyone (IMHO).
If we decide that deleting the frame is the correct solution in this
particular case, the most simple option is to call `quit-window' with
both arguments t, thus killing the buffer as well.
martin
- bug#7533: 24.0.50; `dired-mark-pop-up': delete frame afterwards if `pop-up-frames', Drew Adams, 2012/04/05
- bug#7533: 24.0.50; `dired-mark-pop-up': delete frame afterwards if `pop-up-frames', martin rudalics, 2012/04/06
- bug#7533: 24.0.50; `dired-mark-pop-up': delete frame afterwards if `pop-up-frames', Drew Adams, 2012/04/06
- bug#7533: 24.0.50; `dired-mark-pop-up': delete frame afterwards if `pop-up-frames', martin rudalics, 2012/04/06
- bug#7533: 24.0.50; `dired-mark-pop-up': delete frame afterwards if `pop-up-frames', Drew Adams, 2012/04/06
- bug#7533: 24.0.50; `dired-mark-pop-up': delete frame afterwards if `pop-up-frames', martin rudalics, 2012/04/06
- bug#7533: 24.0.50; `dired-mark-pop-up': delete frame afterwards if `pop-up-frames', Drew Adams, 2012/04/06
- bug#7533: 24.0.50; `dired-mark-pop-up': delete frame afterwards if `pop-up-frames',
martin rudalics <=
- bug#7533: 24.0.50; `dired-mark-pop-up': delete frame afterwards if `pop-up-frames', Drew Adams, 2012/04/06
- bug#7533: 24.0.50; `dired-mark-pop-up': delete frame afterwards if `pop-up-frames', Drew Adams, 2012/04/18