Re: threads and kill-buffer

[PJ Weisberg]

On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 7:41 AM, martin rudalics <address@hidden> wrote:
>>>  >> ... and what if this buffer was meanwhile revived by another thread?
>>>  >
>>>  > No other thread can revive that buffer, because the buffer is
>>>  > invisible to any buffer but those who have it as current.
>>>  >
>>>  > The "revived" buffer will be a different buffer, perhaps with the same
>>>  > name.
>>>
>>> How could that work with buffers like *Help* or *Backtrace* which are
>>> revived all the time?  Do you want to clone them?
>>
>> I don't understand the problem that bothers you.  Please elaborate.
>
> Suppose *Backtrace* is current in thread A and gets killed by thread B.
> Before making another buffer current for A, a debugger buffer must be
> revived for B.  Would that be a different buffer from the *Backtrace*
> seen in A?

A more interesting question is, what does (get-buffer "*Backtrace*")
return in thread A?

I can think of a few commands in Magit that would not behave properly
if (get-buffer-create some-string) returned a buffer that couldn't be
displayed after the command finished.  (Though I'm having a much
harder time imagining how one of those functions could be called with
a current-buffer that's in the process of being killed.)

-PJ

Gehm's Corollary to Clark's Law: Any technology distinguishable from
magic is insufficiently advanced.