Subject: Re: bug#75056: 31.0.50; tty-child-frames with server / multiple clients possible hangs

From: Eli Zaretskii <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 26 Jan 2025 09:57:33 +0200

> From: Gerd Möllmann <[email-masked]>
> Cc: [email-masked],  [email-masked]
> Date: Sun, 26 Jan 2025 07:26:06 +0100
> 
> Eli Zaretskii <[email-masked]> writes:
> 
> > First, there's no "iconified" frames on TTYs, right? so this function
> > can never return 'icon' in that case, correct?  And I presume
> > iconify-frame is a no-op for TTY frames?
> 
> Martin mentioned in passing that he thinks iconifying frames on ttys
> should perhaps do something. So it's maybe a "not yet".

What could that "something" possibly be?  Martin?

> > More importantly, what frames could have this function return nil?
> > E.g., can a non-child frame return nil?
> 
> Yes. C-x 5 2 can make a new root frame, and only one is visible on
> the display.

So only the top root frame now returns visible = t?

> > Also, what do make-frame-visible and raise-frame do with TTY frames
> > for which frame-visible-p returns nil, and what does
> > make-frame-invisible do for those TTY frames for which this function
> > returns non-nil?
> 
> raise-frame is make-frame-visible + changing z-order, make-frame-visible
> and make-frame-invisible change the "visible" flag. (Just notices
> make-frame-visible talks about "X window", hm.).
> 
> Did you mean these doc strings should be changed, too, or did you mean
> something else?

I wanted first to understand what happens with this on TTY frames.
Then we'd need to update the doc strings and also the manuals.