[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: A wish, a plea

From: Eli Zaretskii
Subject: Re: A wish, a plea
Date: Fri, 22 Jun 2007 15:57:48 +0300

> Cc: Karl Fogel <address@hidden>, address@hidden, address@hidden,
>         address@hidden
> From: David Kastrup <address@hidden>
> Date: Fri, 22 Jun 2007 14:43:52 +0200
> > It sounds awful to me.  It reminds me Notepad and Word with their
> > pesky UNNAMED and DOCUMENT1 defaults.
> Being reminded of Notepad and Word is not in itself good or bad.
> Could you explain where the peskiness lies?

I don't like software that decides for me whether I do or don't want
to write a document, and on top of that decides what would be the name
of that file.

> > Did anyone in this longish thread suggest to simply turn on
> > auto-save in *scratch*, like we do in *mail* buffers?  If not, would
> > that solve the OP's problem without any significant nasty side
> > effects?
> Uh, it has the nasty side effect of starting to write to my disk
> without asking my confirmation.

The same happens in *mail* buffers.  How is this case different?

> If I have started several Emacs
> instances, I don't want them complaining about file locks and similar
> nonsense just because I use the *scratch* buffer in both.

Did you actually try that in *scratch*?  I don't think there will be
any locks, since I didn't suggest to give the buffer an associated
file, just to turn on auto-save in it.  That's a different thing.

> I don't really think that *scratch* should usually be associated with
> any file.

That's not what I suggested.  I suggested the equivalent of

  (auto-save-mode 1)

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]