bug#34749: 26.1; `delete-windows-on': (1) doc, (2) bug, (3) bug, (4) candidates

[martin rudalics]

> Maybe we are having a misunderstanding.  Because all I meant is to
> have each of the possible values of FRAME be expressible with some
> form of prefix-arg.  There are several such forms available:
>
>   . just C-u
>   . C-u with a numeric argument
>   . repeated C-u C-u ...
>
> We currently only use the second of these, and with a single numeric
> argument of zero.  What I had in mind is to use the other forms, and
> perhaps also other numeric arguments, to allow users in interactive
> invocation access to all possible values of FRAME.

I understood that part.

>> The doc-string should hopefully tell these details now.
>
> I'm not sure it covers the use case described by Drew.  Maybe I'm
> missing something.

I'm not sure either.

>> The fact that 'delete-windows-on' is the only function (together with
>> its 'quit-window-on' clone) with the inverted meaning of the
>> FRAME/ALL-FRAMES argument makes me doubt that such an interpretation
>> would make sense.
>
> Do you still think that, after reading my explanation above?

You mean to use a universal prefix nomenclature such that, for
example, 0 means all visible and iconified frames, 1 all windows on
the selected frame, 2 all visible frames (for a C-u with a numeric
argument only solution) and so on?  But the most interesting functions
that would benefit from such a nomenclature are `other-window' and
`other-frame' and both use the prefix argument for skipping.  Still,
don't count my opinion here - I don't use or specify prefix arguments.

> It's described in this passage from "Using Interactive":
>
>     There are three possibilities for the argument ARG-DESCRIPTOR:
>
>     [...]
>     • It may be a string; its contents are a sequence of elements
>       separated by newlines, one for each argument(1).  Each element
>       consists of a code character (*note Interactive Codes::) optionally
>       followed by a prompt (which some code characters use and some
>       ignore).  Here is an example:
>
>            (interactive "P\nbFrobnicate buffer: ")
>
>       The code letter ‘P’ sets the command’s first argument to the raw
>       command prefix (*note Prefix Command Arguments::).  ‘bFrobnicate
>       buffer: ’ prompts the user with ‘Frobnicate buffer: ’ to enter the
>       name of an existing buffer, which becomes the second and final
>       argument.

That text is all right and yet was incomprehensible for me at first
(and second) reading.  It's probably just me, so ignore that.

martin