[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
bug#28373: [PATCH] New variable controls whether dired confirms to kill
bug#28373: [PATCH] New variable controls whether dired confirms to kill buffers visiting deleted files
Wed, 06 Sep 2017 19:36:48 +0300
> From: Alex Branham <address@hidden>
> Date: Wed, 06 Sep 2017 10:42:37 -0500
> This is a patch to include a new variable that, when set to nil, makes dired
> kill buffers visiting deleted files without confirmation.
> There are apparently some people interested in this:
> I read through the CONTRIBUTE file, but please let me know if something is
> wrong with the commit message and I can redo it.
Thanks. A few comments:
> * lisp/dired-x.el (dired-clean-confirm-killing-deleted-buffers):
> * lisp/dired.el (dired-clean-up-after-deletion): Just kill buffers
> visiting deleted files without confirming if
> dired-clean-confirm-killing-deleted-buffers is nil
This log entry makes it sound as if similar changes were made in both
dired.el and dired-x.el, which is not what your changes do. The entry
for dired-x.el should only say this:
* lisp/dired-x.el (dired-clean-confirm-killing-deleted-buffers): New variable.
> diff --git a/lisp/dired.el b/lisp/dired.el
> index ff62183f09..bac3933502 100644
> --- a/lisp/dired.el
> +++ b/lisp/dired.el
> @@ -3164,28 +3164,34 @@ dired-delete-entry
> (dired-clean-up-after-deletion file))
> (defvar dired-clean-up-buffers-too)
> +(defvar dired-clean-confirm-killing-deleted-buffers)
Why did you need this defvar?
> (defun dired-clean-up-after-deletion (fn)
> "Clean up after a deleted file or directory FN.
> -Removes any expanded subdirectory of deleted directory.
> -If `dired-x' is loaded and `dired-clean-up-buffers-too' is non-nil,
> -also offers to kill buffers visiting deleted files and directories."
> +Removes any expanded subdirectory of deleted directory. If
> +`dired-x' is loaded and `dired-clean-up-buffers-too' is non-nil,
> +also offers to kill buffers visiting deleted files and
> +directories. Similarly, if `dired-x' is loaded and
> +`dired-clean-confirm-killing-deleted-buffers is nil, kill the
> +buffers without asking.'"
We use the US English convention of leaving 2 spaces between
sentences. Also, I'd simplify the last sentence to avoid repeating
what the previous one says, and perhaps even make one sentence out of
> (save-excursion (and (cdr dired-subdir-alist)
> - (dired-goto-subdir fn)
> - (dired-kill-subdir)))
> + (dired-goto-subdir fn)
> + (dired-kill-subdir)))
Please don't change whitespace where you aren't changing code.
> + (or (not dired-clean-confirm-killing-deleted-buffers)
> + (funcall #'y-or-n-p
> + (format "Kill buffer of %s, too? "
> + (file-name-nondirectory fn))))
Isn't it better to use this instead:
? What you wrote is akin to double negation, IMO.
Thanks again for working on this.