Re: Terminology in multi-tty primitives

[Stephen J. Turnbull]

Stefan Monnier writes:

 > We all agree.  What you're describing is a command: the "consistent
 > behavior" is user-level behavior, not Lisp-level behavior.
 > So we do have the suspend-frame command for that purpose.
 > 
 > But we're here talking about whether such a *function* would make
 > sense and how.

Huh?  On systems where stopping a process makes sense, `suspend-emacs'
does so.  On other systems, it starts a subshell.

Attaching "suspend emacs" semantics to a (Lisp-level) "withdraw frame"
function will cause nothing but trouble, and I'm very surprised that
this amount of discussion could be generated on such a premise.

As far as I can see, Lisp (in general) has no need-to-know about the
implementation of frames or terminals.  That's entirely the province
of redisplay and (because of the human penchant for imprecision) UI.
The API I sketched has the bare minimum of implementation knowledge:
enough to distinguish ambiguities in interpretation of terminal names.