[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
bug#26650: 26.0.50; Protect *Backtrace* from accidental killing
From: |
npostavs |
Subject: |
bug#26650: 26.0.50; Protect *Backtrace* from accidental killing |
Date: |
Wed, 26 Apr 2017 08:52:26 -0400 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/25.2 (gnu/linux) |
Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> writes:
>> >> + (add-hook 'kill-buffer-hook
>> >> + (lambda () (if (> (recursion-depth) 0) (top-level))) nil t)
>> >
>> > This will throw to top-level when _any_ buffer is killed, as long as
>> > we are in recursive-edit, no?
>> No, because `add-hook' is called with non-nil LOCAL arg.
>
> Right, sorry for not paying attention.
Maybe I should have written
(add-hook 'kill-buffer-hook (lambda ...) nil 'local)
to emphasize this? I'm still undecided on the general style question of
whether to use t or '<symbol> in these cases.
- bug#26650: 26.0.50; Protect *Backtrace* from accidental killing, Tino Calancha, 2017/04/25
- bug#26650: 26.0.50; Protect *Backtrace* from accidental killing, npostavs, 2017/04/25
- bug#26650: 26.0.50; Protect *Backtrace* from accidental killing, Tino Calancha, 2017/04/25
- bug#26650: 26.0.50; Protect *Backtrace* from accidental killing, npostavs, 2017/04/25
- bug#26650: 26.0.50; Protect *Backtrace* from accidental killing, Tino Calancha, 2017/04/25
- bug#26650: 26.0.50; Protect *Backtrace* from accidental killing, Eli Zaretskii, 2017/04/26
- bug#26650: 26.0.50; Protect *Backtrace* from accidental killing, Tino Calancha, 2017/04/26
- bug#26650: 26.0.50; Protect *Backtrace* from accidental killing, Eli Zaretskii, 2017/04/26
- bug#26650: 26.0.50; Protect *Backtrace* from accidental killing,
npostavs <=
- bug#26650: 26.0.50; Protect *Backtrace* from accidental killing, Tino Calancha, 2017/04/26
- bug#26650: 26.0.50; Protect *Backtrace* from accidental killing, Eli Zaretskii, 2017/04/26
- bug#26650: 26.0.50; Protect *Backtrace* from accidental killing, Michael Heerdegen, 2017/04/26