[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: why pop-to-buffer has this ugly behavior?
From: |
Klaus Berndl |
Subject: |
Re: why pop-to-buffer has this ugly behavior? |
Date: |
22 Jan 2004 20:13:17 +0100 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.3 |
I have already sent a followup to my first posting where i apologize for my
noise - was my fault - have forgotten the existence of
`same-window-regexps'...
So again: Please excuse!
Klaus
On Thu, 22 Jan 2004, Stefan Monnier wrote:
> > It is not the job of pop-to-buffer to decide on the buffer-name when to
> > split but it is the job of libraries like cus-edit.el to decide this.
>
> Separation of concern implies that cus-edit should not need to care and
> should not decide whether to split a window or create a new frame.
> It should be decided by the user's preference.
>
> Now, the bhavior of pop-to-buffer is sufficiently complex and customizable
> that I can't tell you why you see this difference, but it does not only
> depend on the buffer name but also on the current window (whether it's
> a minibuffer or a dedicated window, for example).
>
> > BTW: here is how XEmacs implements custom-create-buffer - IMO the right
> > way:
>
> This way [i.e. using switch-to-buffer] breaks when called from the
> minibuffer, breaks when called from a dedicated window, and might not
> correspond to the user's preference.
>
> If all code used pop-to-buffer, ECB could solve all its problems by only
> customizing pop-to-buffer, so it obviously does not inherently make things
> hard for ECB-like libraries, quite the opposite.
>
>
> Stefan
--
Klaus Berndl mailto: klaus.berndl@sdm.de
sd&m AG http://www.sdm.de
software design & management
Carl-Wery-Str. 42, 81739 Muenchen, Germany
Tel +49 89 63812-392, Fax -220