Re: Stop frames stealing eachothers' minibuffers!

[Stefan Monnier]

>>> Isn't the main reason for this that it has never been possible to
>>> interact with a MBn when a MBm, with m > n, was active?
>> Well, it's at best an indirect cause of the bug, but yes, it's the reason
>> why this bug wasn't visible until now.
> Put another way, is it not problematic to interact with and/or terminate
> a recursive edit while one or more higher level recursive edits
> are underway?

I think "interact with" should be OK (I can see situations where you'd
use two minibuffers, where you copy text from one to the other), but
since the invocations have to obey the nesting, exiting from the
non-deepest minibuffer is indeed a problem.

We could start by signaling an error when trying to exit the
non-deepest minibuffer?

> Do you think the recipe with more than two frames I just sent
> demonstrates a bug?

If you're referring to the recipe to which I responded, then yes.


        Stefan