From xemacs-m  Sun Mar 23 18:14:01 1997
Received: from mailbox2.ucsd.edu (mailbox2.ucsd.edu [132.239.1.54])
	by xemacs.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id SAA09544
	for <xemacs-beta@xemacs.org>; Sun, 23 Mar 1997 18:14:00 -0600 (CST)
Received: from sdnp5.ucsd.edu (sdnp5.ucsd.edu [132.239.79.10]) by mailbox2.ucsd.edu (8.8.5/8.6.9) with SMTP id QAA24801 for <xemacs-beta@xemacs.org>; Sun, 23 Mar 1997 16:14:01 -0800 (PST)
Received: by sdnp5.ucsd.edu (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4)
	id QAA05023; Sun, 23 Mar 1997 16:15:55 -0800
Sender: dmoore@sdnp5.ucsd.edu
To: XEmacs Beta Mailing List <xemacs-beta@xemacs.org>
Subject: Re: patches to compile.el
References: <199703230329.WAA05074@pochacco.alphatech.com> 	<m267yimdxs.fsf@altair.xemacs.org> 	<rvohcaxkt7.fsf@sdnp5.ucsd.edu> <QQcieg24048.199703232340@crystal.WonderWorks.COM>
X-Face: "oX;zS#-JU$-,WKSzG.1gGE]x^cIg!hW.dq>.f6pzS^A+(k!T|M:}5{_%>Io<>L&{hO7W4cicOQ|>/lZ1G(m%7iaCf,6Qgk0%%Bz7b2-W3jd0m_UG\Y;?]}4s0O-U)uox>P3JN)9cm]O\@,vy2e{`3pb!"pqmRy3peB90*2L
Mail-Copies-To: never
Mime-Version: 1.0 (generated by tm-edit 7.106)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
From: David Moore <dmoore@ucsd.edu>
Date: 23 Mar 1997 16:15:54 -0800
In-Reply-To: Kyle Jones's message of Sun, 23 Mar 1997 18:40:49 -0500 (EST)
Message-ID: <rvlo7exhz9.fsf@sdnp5.ucsd.edu>
Lines: 19
X-Mailer: Gnus v5.4.33/XEmacs 19.15(beta103)

Kyle Jones <kyle_jones@wonderworks.com> writes:

> Seems dubious.  Which prompt in which minibuffer should it return?
> If we bring it back, then we have to answer this question.  I
> don't want to try to answer it.

Uh, the top most one?  They are all stacked.  The one associated with
the current return values of `(minibuffer-depth)' and
`(active-minibuffer-window)'.

Unless I'm missing something in minibuf.c, I don't see how you can get
to anything other than the top most minibuffer at any time.  It should
follow you around, and if you call read-minibuffer-internal again, it
recursively enters the command loop, and you can't get to the previous
minibuffer until you've popped that one.

So, basically there is only one minibuffer and one prompt accessible at
any given time.  The current code returns that prompt, which seems
reasonable to me.

