bug#4293: marked as done (23.1; use pop-to-buffer, not switch...other-window, in bookmark.el)

[Emacs bug Tracking System]

Your message dated Sun, 04 Oct 2009 22:01:43 -0400
with message-id <87skdymwe0.fsf@red-bean.com>
and subject line Re: use pop-to-buffer, not switch...other-window, in 
bookmark.el
has caused the Emacs bug report #4293,
regarding 23.1; use pop-to-buffer, not switch...other-window, in bookmark.el
to be marked as done.

This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.

(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact owner@emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com
immediately.)


-- 
4293: http://emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=4293
Emacs Bug Tracking System
Contact owner@emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com with problems
> --- Begin Message ---
>
>
>
> Subject: 
>
> 23.1; use pop-to-buffer, not switch...other-window, in bookmark.el
>
>
>
>
> Date: 
>
> Sun, 30 Aug 2009 07:52:34 -0700
>
>
>
>
> In bookmark-jump-other-window and bookmark-bmenu-other-window we call
> switch-to-buffer-other-window. We should use pop-to-buffer, instead.
>  
> With non-nil pop-up-frames, switch-to-buffer-other-window creates a
> new frame each time, even if the destination buffer is already showing
> in some frame. pop-to-buffer DTRT: it reuses the existing frame.
>  
>
> In GNU Emacs 23.1.1 (i386-mingw-nt5.1.2600)
>  of 2009-07-29 on SOFT-MJASON
> Windowing system distributor `Microsoft Corp.', version 5.1.2600
> configured using `configure --with-gcc (4.4)'
>
>
>
>
>
> --- End Message ---
> --- Begin Message ---
>
>
>
> Subject: 
>
> Re: use pop-to-buffer, not switch...other-window, in bookmark.el
>
>
>
>
> Date: 
>
> Sun, 04 Oct 2009 22:01:43 -0400
>
>
>
>
> tags unreproducible
> --
>
> Closing this as "unreproducible".  Or anyway, attempting to close as
> unreproducible -- our bug tracker is too unusuable for me to be
> confident of the effects of the commands I'm trying to issue.
>
> FWIW, here's a response I typed up before reading the full bug
> correspondence.  It's not relevant anymore, but if the bug ever
> reappears, it might become relevant to testers:
>
>   This would change the user-visible behavior.  For example, assume
>   you're in a frame with one window, displaying buffer X.  In the
>   current code, doing 'M-x bookmark-jump-other-window' and entering
>   bookmark "foo" at the prompt will open a new window displaying buffer
>   Y (assuming 'foo' points to a location in Y).  In other words, the
>   frame will be divided into two windows.
>
>   But if we replace "switch-to-buffer-other-window" with "pop-to-buffer"
>   in `bookmark-jump-other-window', then the new behavior will be to
>   *replace* the current whole-frame window displaying X with a new
>   whole-frame window displaying Y.  That is not the desired behavior.
>
> --- End Message ---