From: Carsten Dominik <email@example.com>
To: Samuel Wales <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Subject: Re: pop-up-windows
Date: Wed, 6 May 2009 14:14:49 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <22E47E07-CA61-4BA9-8992-3339A9084A37@gmail.com> (raw)
On Apr 25, 2009, at 5:44 AM, Samuel Wales wrote:
> When I click on a link, org-open-at-point splits the window.
> What I would like is for it to open the link in the current
> window. The same occurs with org-remember; it splits the
> window, but I would like to have the whole window.
> Both Emacs and Xemacs have a standard variable,
> pop-up-windows, that allows the user to control this
> behavior. Users who set it to nil can expect all but the
> most unusual buffers to open in the current window. Most
> parts of emacs respect it.
I do not use display-buffer in Org, because the results are
so unpredictable for different users precisely because there
is a plethora of options and hooks that do modify the behavior.
This makes it difficult to create a consistent interface, at
least in my opinion.
As mentioned in this thread, use org-link-frame-setup to
customize this for links.
For remember you can use
(add-hook 'remember-mode-hook 'delete-other-windows)
> IMO it would be useful for org to do the same. It is easy to do,
> because you can call pop-to-buffer instead of
> Try these:
> (let ((pop-up-windows t)) (pop-to-buffer (get-buffer "*Messages*")))
> (let ((pop-up-windows)) (pop-to-buffer (get-buffer "*Messages*")))
> People who use small screens and people who use large fonts
> use nil because splitting the window makes small windows.
> In org, todo state selection and tag selection should
> probably ignore the variable, provided that the window
> height contains the buffer. The context is useful, so it's
> OK to split the window.
Exactly, this is what drove me crazy and toward
abandoning pop-to-buffer and display-buffer entirely.
> Export dispatch and agenda dispatch should probably respect
> the variable because context usually does not add to the
> decision being made (among other reasons). They do not
> currently respect it.
I don't think this is an issue. These commands make the
buffer as large as needed to display their entire content.
If necessary they will remove the other window. So with a
large font, they can use the whole frame.
In general, I do like the other window to remain visible
if enough space is there, to remind the user of the calling
> org-complete is currently problematic because it
> inadvertently respects the variable. It changes to the
> completions buffer, and then the completion keys do not
I don't understand. What is the problem?
> This should probably either ignore the variable or accept the
> completion keys. However, I do not use it, so I have not
> tried it much.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-05-06 12:15 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-04-25 3:44 pop-up-windows Samuel Wales
2009-05-06 12:14 ` Carsten Dominik [this message]
2009-05-28 22:49 ` pop-up-windows Samuel Wales
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
List information: https://www.orgmode.org/
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this public inbox
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).