window configurations no longer (since 21.5) include windows

[Michael Sperber]

Thanks for working on this!

Two questions:

ht at inf.ed.ac.uk (Henry S. Thompson) writes:

> *** xemacs-21.5-upstream/lisp/window-xemacs.el	Thu Mar 20 09:14:09 2008
> --- xemacs-21.5-mine/lisp/window-xemacs.el	Sun Mar 16 20:28:15 2008
> ***************
> *** 35,40 ****
> --- 35,51 ----
>   
>   ;;; Code:
>   
> + ;; Protect two crucial functions from the impact of advice
> + ;; (Any others need to be treated similarly?)
> + ;; ht at inf.ed.ac.uk Sun Mar 16 09:27:35 2008
> + 
> + (unless (fboundp 'orig-split-window)
> +   (fset 'orig-split-window (symbol-function 'split-window)))
> + 
> + (unless (fboundp 'orig-delete-window)
> +   (fset 'orig-delete-window (symbol-function 'delete-window)))
> + 

What specifically is this bit for?  Did you see concrete instances of
advice for `split-window' and `delete-window' that would break the
window-configuration code?

> + (defmacro save-window-excursion/mapping (&rest body)
> +   "Execute BODY, preserving window sizes and contents.
> + Restores which buffer appears in which window, where display starts,
> + as well as the current buffer.
> + Does not restore the value of point in current buffer.
> + On non-error return, value is cons of BODY value and list of
> + remapped windows (see set-window-configuration/mapping for
> + more on remapping)."

Do we really the need the cons return value?  It seems the return value
of `save-window-excursion' is rarely used---I'd rather just return the
mapping, and the let the user preserve the return value if necessary?
(I didn't see a use for `save-window-excursion/mapping' in your ECB
patch, which is why I'm asking.)

-- 
Cheers =8-} Mike
Friede, Völkerverständigung und überhaupt blabla