Re: Allow controlling the effect of visibility on buffer switching

[Matt Armstrong]

Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> writes:

>> From: Thuna <thuna.cing@gmail.com>
>> Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org
>> Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2022 16:46:32 +0300
>> 
>> 
>> > Thanks, but why do we need such an option, given that we have
>> > buffer-change history, and so the visible buffers are usually just a
>> > couple of keystrokes away, like M-n?
>> 
>> If a buffer is open in multiple windows and one of these windows is
>> momentarily switched off of to look at something else, it is unintuitive
>> for buffer switching to default to a non-visible buffer instead of the
>> previously open buffer.  More often than not, a quick [C-x b RET] is,
>> and should be, sufficient for switching buffers.  Forcing the user to
>> actively choose the buffer they want introduces unnecessary burden which
>> can be a significant source of distraction over time.
>
> Forcing users to learn too many options is also not a very good idea,
> and we already have gobs of them.  So much so that even the head
> maintainers don't remember that many of them exist.
>
> So I'm asking whether "C-x b M-n RET" is not a good enough solution
> for this use case?  Does anyone else have an opinion?

I might be one person that at least tries this patch out, but I think it
would take me a while to figure out if I like it.

In 25 years I haven't picked up on the idea that C-x b RET could be a
quick "get me back to the previous buffer" habbit, probably because it
doesn't always work.

I sometimes keep multiple frames open and forget what is going on in the
other frame.  In this disorganized state, the "Buffers not visible in
windows are preferred to visible buffers" feature just means Emacs acts
strangely.

I sometimes split a frame to look at different parts of the same buffer.
This changes what C-x b RET does.

Thuna, have you used this patch for a while and found it to your liking?