[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: display-buffer-overriding-action
From: |
Stefan Monnier |
Subject: |
Re: display-buffer-overriding-action |
Date: |
Tue, 13 Sep 2011 20:53:58 -0400 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.0.50 (gnu/linux) |
>>> - Commands like `C-x 5 b' or `info-other-window', which fall under the
>>> "explicit command" criterion and should override the defaults.
>> This case depends:
>> - historically, it has obeyed special-display-*, which would mean it
>> should obey d-b-alist as well.
> Yeah, and I don't think it works very well as an exception (especially
> since the special display only kicks in halfway through the window
> selection process, after Emacs has tried to reuse a window).
I don't know what you're referring to. The reuse that takes place
before is not only harmless: special-display-popup-frame redoes its own
reuse check in case the earlier code didn't do a thorough enough job,
because reusing is what we want to do if possible rather than create
a new dedicated frame.
> If we want to keep this functionality, one way to do this would be to
> make d-b-overriding-action into an alist as well, so that the actions
> would come from (in order of priority)
> defcustom d-b-override-alist
> Lisp ACTION
> defcustom d-b-alist
> defvar d-b-default-action
I have no idea what you're trying to achieve with such a re-organisation.
>> - there are several other `other-window' cases where it's not nearly
>> as clear cut that the user really meant to override d-b-alist
>> (e.g. because it's the only command that has a convenient key
>> binding).
> Which cases are you referring to? Probably they ought to let-bind
> d-b-default-action---or be changed to use display-buffer generically.
Maybe you're right. In any case, right now they should most likely call
switch-to-buffer-other-* so as to avoid deciding how to implement it.
> And you've argued that s-t-b-other-window/frame should override
> d-b-alist.
Not quite: I argued that C-x 5 b should (and yes, C-x 4 b as well).
But that should not necessarily affect callers of s-t-b-other-*, unless
they are in the same situation (i.e. all 3 versions are bound to keys
so that the user's choice is clear).
Also, I do not want to make such a change in 24.1 because I'm not 100%
sure it would really be beneficial. We need to play a bit with
it first.
So for Emacs-24.1, d-b-overriding-default will most likely stay unused,
and that's fine by me.
Stefan
- Re: display-buffer-alist simplifications, (continued)
- Re: display-buffer-alist simplifications, Chong Yidong, 2011/09/02
- Message not available
- Message not available
- Message not available
- Message not available
- Message not available
- Message not available
- Message not available
- Message not available
- Message not available
- Message not available
- Message not available
- Message not available
- Message not available
- Message not available
- Message not available
- display-buffer-overriding-action, Chong Yidong, 2011/09/11
- Re: display-buffer-overriding-action, Juanma Barranquero, 2011/09/11
- Re: display-buffer-overriding-action, Stefan Monnier, 2011/09/12
- Re: display-buffer-overriding-action, Chong Yidong, 2011/09/12
- Re: display-buffer-overriding-action, Stefan Monnier, 2011/09/13
- Re: display-buffer-overriding-action, Chong Yidong, 2011/09/13
- Re: display-buffer-overriding-action, Chong Yidong, 2011/09/13
- Re: display-buffer-overriding-action, Stefan Monnier, 2011/09/13
- Re: display-buffer-overriding-action, Chong Yidong, 2011/09/13
- Re: display-buffer-overriding-action,
Stefan Monnier <=
- Re: display-buffer-overriding-action, Chong Yidong, 2011/09/13
- Re: display-buffer-overriding-action, Stefan Monnier, 2011/09/14
- Re: display-buffer-overriding-action, Chong Yidong, 2011/09/14
- Re: display-buffer-overriding-action, Stefan Monnier, 2011/09/14