From xemacs-m  Sat Mar  1 00:32:52 1997
Received: from crystal.WonderWorks.COM (crystal.WonderWorks.com [192.203.206.1])
	by xemacs.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id AAA18571
	for <xemacs-beta@xemacs.org>; Sat, 1 Mar 1997 00:32:51 -0600 (CST)
Received: by crystal.WonderWorks.COM 
	id QQceyk04453; Sat, 1 Mar 1997 01:32:51 -0500 (EST)
Date: Sat, 1 Mar 1997 01:32:51 -0500 (EST)
Message-Id: <QQceyk04453.199703010632@crystal.WonderWorks.COM>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Kyle Jones <kyle_jones@wonderworks.com>
To: xemacs-beta@xemacs.org
Subject: Re: annoying buffer switching/focus  behavior
In-Reply-To: <m29148yzmv.fsf@altair.xemacs.org>
References: <yvtafoo8frj.fsf@corona.pixar.com>
	<m29148yzmv.fsf@altair.xemacs.org>
X-Face: /cA45WHG7jWq>(O3&Z57Y<"WsX5ddc,4c#w0F*zrV#=M
        0@~@,s;b,aMtR5Sqs"+nU.z^CSFQ9t`z2>W,S,]:[+2^
        Nbf6v4g>!&,7R4Ot4Wg{&tm=WX7P["9%a)_da48-^tGy
        ,qz]Z,Zz\{E.,]'EO+F)@$KtF&V

Steven L Baur writes:
 > Hunter Kelly writes:
 > 
 > > I've seen this behavior in many of the XEmacs 19.15 betas.
 > 
 > I don't think this behavior is new, it's been around awhile.
 > 
 > > I thought it went away around 90 or so, but it is here in 92 (I
 > > know, I have had a ton of work...).
 > 
 >  ...
 > 
 > > I think this behavior is wrong.  It shouldn't have anything to do with
 > > the focus model when it is fixed, either.
 > 
 > > Hunter, who has like 9 frames laying around and doesn't want to have
 > > to find the one with a particular buffer in it to see it, dangit.
 > 
 > Agreed, there's a real bug involved.  list-buffers calls
 > display-buffer and its DOC string reads:
 > 
 > If `pop-up-windows' is non-nil, always use the
 > current frame and create a new window regardless of whether the
 > buffer has a dedicated frame, and regardless of whether
 > OVERRIDE-FRAME was specified.
 > 
 > C-h v pop-up-windows
 > pop-up-windows's value is t
 > 
 > :-(

On the other hand, the doc for get-frame-per-buffer says

    ...
    If a buffer is already displayed in a frame, then
    `instance-limit' is ignored, and that frame is used.

So it is documented.  It's been like this for quite a while,
since 19.10 at least.

