GNU bug report logs - #75828
[PATCH] Correct make-frame docstring vis-a-vis make_frame.c

Previous Next

Full log

Message #20 received at 75828 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Ship Mints <shipmints <at> gmail.com>
To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
Cc: 75828 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, stefankangas <at> gmail.com
Subject: Re: bug#75828: [PATCH] Correct make-frame docstring vis-a-vis
 make_frame.c
Date: Sat, 25 Jan 2025 10:47:27 -0500

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

Because I want a guaranteed new frame with the explicitly specified buffer.

I assume this is also an issue for child frames--make_frame doesn't
distinguish during buffer selection?

The following works but is wonky (kind of annoying) because it first shows
a non-hidden buffer, and then switches to the one I really want (note that
string pixel width is just an example that we all have at hand):

(with-selected-frame (make-frame)
  ;; (select-frame-set-input-focus (selected-frame)) ; might need based on
platform
  (switch-to-buffer " *string-pixel-width*"))

-Stephane

On Sat, Jan 25, 2025 at 10:32 AM Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org> wrote:

> > From: Ship Mints <shipmints <at> gmail.com>
> > Date: Sat, 25 Jan 2025 10:21:52 -0500
> > Cc: Stefan Kangas <stefankangas <at> gmail.com>, 75828 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
> >
> > I tried. It looks like having a control of some kind for make-frame, or
> altering make_frame to not use
> > other_buffer_safely, are the only options.
> >
> > make_frame calls other_buffer_safely which ignores the suggested frame
> parameters.
>
> Can you tell why you must use make-frame and not, say,
> switch-to-buffer-other-frame?
>

[Message part 2 (text/html, inline)]

Previous Next

GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.