(no title)
vifon
|
2 years ago
My relatively new stance is that sometimes having an Emacs process that doesn't share the state is a feature, not a flaw. Specifically I started using non-daemon Emacs processes alongside my main Emacs daemon to compartmentalize my work. Each non-trivial project, or "workspace", gets its own Emacs process, possibly with a persistent state with desktop-save & desktop-change-dir. The newish tab-bar-mode helps with that a lot as I cannot stand using multiple frames on a non-daemon Emacs due to it not always being obvious when I close just a frame and when I close the whole process.
mbork_pl|2 years ago
That is a fair point, though not really fitting my workflow. (Also, my Emacs needs ~20 seconds to start, and I tend to have Emacs uptime of several days or sometimes even weeks.)
> I cannot stand using multiple frames on a non-daemon Emacs due to it not always being obvious when I close just a frame and when I close the whole process.
This is strange. In my Emacs, C-x 5 0 on the last frame results in "Attempt to delete the sole visible or iconified frame". (And I have `(setq confirm-kill-emacs #'yes-or-no-p)` in my init.el anyway.)
vifon|2 years ago
hsbauauvhabzb|2 years ago
firewolf34|2 years ago
This is useful for segregating groups of work related to a set of files but I would be interested if there's anything for arbitrary unsaved buffers in general.
cmrdporcupine|2 years ago
mbork_pl|2 years ago