Stefan Monnier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> I realize that you can't expect Emacs to know when you are done with a >> window unless you actually tell when. The obvious way to tell when is >> to type `C-x 1' or `C-x 0', but this leaves the temporary buffer >> lingering, which makes me nervous. > > The way Emacs is expected to deal with it, is via the notion of > dedicated windows. When a window is created by display-buffer, it > is sometimes marked as dedicated, so that if the buffer it displays > is killed the window is deleted (and if it's the only window in the > frame, the frame is also deleted).
Interesting... I didn't know that. > I think Emacs should be a bit more aggressive about marking > windows dedicated. I see. What are some examples of windows currently marked dedicated? > My locally hacked Emacs has changed it to *always* mark the window > as dedicated. Does this mean that if you type C-h f cd RET C-x man RET chdir RET, you end up with three windows (assuming you started with just one)? I'm not sure whether that would be good or bad; it might just be less annoying, since in a way you would be more in control of your windows. I guess I'd really have to try it for a while. > The problem with that is that you can't switch-to-buffer in a > dedicated window, so I introduced the notion of "softly-dedicated" > which basically says "this window was created to display buffer FOO > and has never displayed anything else". I.e. it's a form of the > `dedicated' flag which does not prevent switch-to-buffer: > instead when doing switch-to-buffer the flag gets set back to nil to > indicate that the wnidow is not dedicated any more. That's exactly the semantics I had in mind! > It works great in my environment, don't know about others's. It sounds just about perfect. Where can I get the patch? :-) -- Daniel Brockman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> _______________________________________________ Emacs-devel mailing list Emacs-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-devel
