Re: Does display-buffer display the buffer or not?

[martin rudalics]

> I don't know whether it's better.  Maybe because, as I tried to explain
> > earlier, the error handler would call `display-buffer' and fail the same
> > way.
>
> And in response to that I said that then it is left to every
> programmer using display-buffer to handle this very uncommon cases
> instead.

I never disputed that.  But what you said earlier was that

> So the average programmers is supposed to know how to handle this, but
> those writing for example the routines that shows a backtrace when
> there is an error are not.
>
> Why is the average programmer better at avoiding looping here?

and I tried to explain that the average programmer usually doesn't mess
things up in a way that the "very uncommon case" really occurs.  So in
practice the "very uncommon case" usually occurs only when a non-average
programmer fails at writing a good `pop-up-frame-function'.  In that
case, however, signalling an error wouldn't help her much since that
might call the same `pop-up-frame-function' again.

martin