Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

[Proposal] use window-purpose instead of popwin #40

Closed
bmag opened this issue Apr 21, 2015 · 5 comments
Closed

[Proposal] use window-purpose instead of popwin #40

bmag opened this issue Apr 21, 2015 · 5 comments

Comments

@bmag
Copy link

bmag commented Apr 21, 2015

Hi, I wrote a package called window-purpose that gives a good control over where buffers are displayed. I thought you may be interested use it instead of popwin.
I suggest this because of two issues, one posted on guide-key and one posted on Spacemacs.

Issue 1: apparently, sometimes when the screen is split, guide-key's window is too small to display all the available keys. Using window-purpose doesn't have this problem.
You can see a visual illustration in a PR that I opened against Spacemacs and will probably get rejected (it was suggested there to make the change in guide-key instead of Spacemacs).

Issue 2: @paroxyzm asks if guide-key can be displayed in another frame instead of a window. With window-purpose, popping a frame instead of a window is fairly easy.

Tell me if you're interested in this proposal or if you have any questions.

@tcw165
Copy link

tcw165 commented Jun 28, 2015

How about using helm. Is it possible?

@bmag
Copy link
Author

bmag commented Jun 29, 2015

I don't understand, what do you mean?

@stardiviner
Copy link

+1

@bmag bmag closed this as completed May 7, 2016
@clawoflight
Copy link

Can we reopen this?

@bmag
Copy link
Author

bmag commented Jan 28, 2019

Why bother? The maintainer hasn't been active in forever. Switch to which-key, it does more than guide-key and is of higher quality.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants