Re: [emms-help] [Yoni Rabkin] Re: Patch: emms-playlist-tracks-in-region

[Yoni Rabkin]

Fran Burstall <address@hidden> writes:

> Here I was replicating the previous behaviour.
>
> Thinking about it: if I don't kill the buffer and I later run the
> same limiting action, I will want to at least clear the derived
> buffer so as not to present stale results.  So maybe better to just
> kill it and document it in the doc-string.  Either way, I agree that
> the current doc-string does not capture what the function does. 
>
> What do you think?  Kill the derived buffer or not? 

It wouldn't really present stale results since each call to
`emms-playlist-new' creates a unique, numbered buffer.

(emms-playlist-new "foo") => #<buffer foo>
(emms-playlist-new "foo") => #<buffer foo<2>>

The question is therefore if two calls from the same buffer, using the
same limit, should overwrite the derived buffer, or simply create a new
one.

I don't have a strong opinion about that (If someone else has an opinion
they can certainly chime in). Buffers are cheap, but you also may not
want to spam buffers. Feel free to make that as you see fit.

>
> On Tue, 25 Sep 2018 at 19:30, Yoni Rabkin <address@hidden> wrote:
>
>    
>     I've added emms-playlist-limit to the documentation.
>    
>     As I was writing it occurred to me that
>     `emms-playlist-limit-to-all'
>     perhaps should not kill the derived buffer. At least not without
>     adding
>     a mention of that to the function documentation, which currently
>     simply
>     reads:   "Show all tracks again."
>    
>     --
>        "Cut your own wood and it will warm you twice"
>    
>     _______________________________________________
>     Emms-help mailing list
>     address@hidden
>     https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emms-help
>
>
>

-- 
   "Cut your own wood and it will warm you twice"