From xemacs-m  Thu Feb  6 01:00:31 1997
Received: from altair.xemacs.org (steve@xemacs.miranova.com [206.190.83.19])
	by xemacs.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id BAA13575
	for <xemacs-beta@xemacs.org>; Thu, 6 Feb 1997 01:00:30 -0600 (CST)
Received: (from steve@localhost)
	by altair.xemacs.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id XAA10494;
	Wed, 5 Feb 1997 23:11:37 -0800
To: xemacs-beta@xemacs.org
Subject: Re: 20.0: recipe for frame crash
References: <QQcbqw26763.199702060230@crystal.WonderWorks.COM> 	<m291524nxh.fsf@altair.xemacs.org> 	<hhg1za1ref.fsf@dres.elam.org> 	<m268064j9n.fsf@altair.xemacs.org> 	<QQcbri29127.199702060534@crystal.WonderWorks.COM> 	<m23eva4h0m.fsf@altair.xemacs.org> <QQcbrl29821.199702060620@crystal.WonderWorks.COM>
X-Url: http://www.miranova.com/%7Esteve/
Mail-Copies-To: never
X-Face: #!T9!#9s-3o8)*uHlX{Ug[xW7E7Wr!*L46-OxqMu\xz23v|R9q}lH?cRS{rCNe^'[`^sr5"
 f8*@r4ipO6Jl!:Ccq<xoV[Qz2u8<8-+Vwf2gzJ44lf_/y9OaQ`@#Q65{U4/TC)i2`~/M&QI$X>p:9I
 OSS'2{-)-4wBnVeg0S\O4Al@)uC[pD|+
X-Attribution: sb
From: Steven L Baur <steve@miranova.com>
In-Reply-To: Kyle Jones's message of Thu, 6 Feb 1997 01:20:11 -0500 (EST)
Mime-Version: 1.0 (generated by tm-edit 7.101)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Date: 05 Feb 1997 23:11:34 -0800
Message-ID: <m2raiu8l3t.fsf@altair.xemacs.org>
Lines: 34
X-Mailer: Gnus v5.4.11/XEmacs 20.0

Kyle Jones writes:

> Steven L. Baur writes:

>> Can you live with the restriction that you are forbidden to delete
>> XEmacs frames that have live popups around?  I think I have a patch
>> for that.

 [Patch already posted]

> Yes.  I can make balloon-help use a junk unmapped frame as its
> parent if it comes to that.  If it isn't visible the user isn't
> likely to try and delete it and see whatever error it is that you
> devised.

Yup.  Try that.  The frame popup code does not support what you're
trying to do.  Frame popups are attached to the current frame, and (at
least on my system) all the X11 objects in it appear to be deleted
when the parent is deleted.  So you either have a choice of killing
all popups when the parent is killed, or not letting the parent die
so long as there are popups around.  An invisible, global unmapped
frame to parent the popups sounds about as good a solution as any.

I see special-case code littered all over to handle separation of the
minibuffer.  If you can make this work more generally that would be
good.

> On the other hand, I wonder if having an unmapped frame
> around will slow down redisplay any.

I don't know.
-- 
steve@miranova.com baur
Unsolicited commercial e-mail will be billed at $250/message.

