From 38a79e33151c1d81207a24339150e49a5658cb25 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Stefan Monnier Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2008 20:48:57 +0000 Subject: [PATCH] (display-buffer-other-frame): Eliminate problematic code. --- lisp/ChangeLog | 2 ++ lisp/files.el | 15 ++++++++++++--- 2 files changed, 14 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) diff --git a/lisp/ChangeLog b/lisp/ChangeLog index 63e7efd6b7c..1eaad1f0061 100644 --- a/lisp/ChangeLog +++ b/lisp/ChangeLog @@ -1,5 +1,7 @@ 2008-03-11 Stefan Monnier + * files.el (display-buffer-other-frame): Eliminate problematic code. + * menu-bar.el (menu-bar-update-buffers-maxbuf): Remove. (menu-bar-select-buffer): Remove. (menu-bar-select-frame): Make non-interactive and take a frame arg. diff --git a/lisp/files.el b/lisp/files.el index 740bba2764a..a327060dbd0 100644 --- a/lisp/files.el +++ b/lisp/files.el @@ -1078,9 +1078,18 @@ documentation for additional customization information." (old-window (selected-window)) new-window) (setq new-window (display-buffer buffer t)) - (lower-frame (window-frame new-window)) - (make-frame-invisible (window-frame old-window)) - (make-frame-visible (window-frame old-window)))) + ;; This may have been here in order to prevent the new frame from hiding + ;; the old frame. But it does more harm than good. + ;; Maybe we should call `raise-window' on the old-frame instead? --Stef + ;;(lower-frame (window-frame new-window)) + + ;; This may have been here in order to make sure the old-frame gets the + ;; focus. But not only can it cause an annoying flicker, with some + ;; window-managers it just makes the window invisible, with no easy + ;; way to recover it. --Stef + ;;(make-frame-invisible (window-frame old-window)) + ;;(make-frame-visible (window-frame old-window)) + )) (defvar find-file-default nil "Used within `find-file-read-args'.") -- 2.39.2