Re: display-buffer-alist simplifications

[martin rudalics]

> One question: is there any reason you gave the revised `pop-to-buffer-*'
> functions arglists of (&optional buffer-or-name norecord)?  These
> functions didn't exist in Emacs 23, so it seems that they should be
> written to be pluggable into (the revised) display-buffer-alist.  So the
> second argument should instead be an action list instead of NORECORD,
> right?

I don't know.  If we do so, then the action list should be probably also
made an argument of the switch-to-* family of functions which, IIUC,
according to Stefan should remain callable from programs.

I wouldn't have included the pop-to-* functions in the first place but
there are already too many callers around.  So please rewrite them the
way you consider most suitable.

martin