From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "Drew Adams" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#9532: 24.0.50; `special-display-regexps' is no longer respected Date: Mon, 7 Nov 2011 22:47:08 -0800 Message-ID: <2AF8377768F44B7DAA1A96BBE6D1DF2A@us.oracle.com> References: <9202F08DB196437E8AD75A3C535E5A7D@us.oracle.com><87y5xlg9xq.fsf@stupidchicken.com><1D79C6CD14EE4C76B74C446E04B9CA65@us.oracle.com><85680E6E160C472FBC47C2FDA86BA171@us.oracle.com><874o05x4l6.fsf@stupidchicken.com><208166A8F7EF4681B76EADADCA39822C@us.oracle.com><877h51n82z.fsf@stupidchicken.com><8AAF50092BB64E5F8A2E82AF50CC04DB@us.oracle.com><23EB914729DE4B62AF7CBB9AB099B0F8@us.oracle.com> <5DC47C873F1B444AA60B3D2EC2467A57@us.oracle.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1320734900 26543 80.91.229.12 (8 Nov 2011 06:48:20 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 8 Nov 2011 06:48:20 +0000 (UTC) Cc: 9532@debbugs.gnu.org To: "'Stefan Monnier'" Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Nov 08 07:48:13 2011 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([140.186.70.17]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1RNfTf-0001SV-Ai for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Tue, 08 Nov 2011 07:48:11 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:34835 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RNfTe-0006g5-UN for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Tue, 08 Nov 2011 01:48:10 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]:52393) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RNfTb-0006fz-T0 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 08 Nov 2011 01:48:08 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RNfTa-0004gu-JE for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 08 Nov 2011 01:48:07 -0500 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.43]:39449) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RNfTa-0004gq-E3 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 08 Nov 2011 01:48:06 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1RNfWP-0006S8-SW for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 08 Nov 2011 01:51:02 -0500 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: "Drew Adams" Original-Sender: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Tue, 08 Nov 2011 06:51:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 9532 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: Original-Received: via spool by 9532-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B9532.132073501924754 (code B ref 9532); Tue, 08 Nov 2011 06:51:01 +0000 Original-Received: (at 9532) by debbugs.gnu.org; 8 Nov 2011 06:50:19 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1RNfVi-0006RC-CS for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 08 Nov 2011 01:50:18 -0500 Original-Received: from acsinet15.oracle.com ([141.146.126.227]) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1RNfVf-0006R5-Sg for 9532@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 08 Nov 2011 01:50:17 -0500 Original-Received: from ucsinet21.oracle.com (ucsinet21.oracle.com [156.151.31.93]) by acsinet15.oracle.com (Switch-3.4.4/Switch-3.4.4) with ESMTP id pA86lGus010969 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Tue, 8 Nov 2011 06:47:17 GMT Original-Received: from acsmt357.oracle.com (acsmt357.oracle.com [141.146.40.157]) by ucsinet21.oracle.com (8.14.4+Sun/8.14.4) with ESMTP id pA86lFNY020717 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Tue, 8 Nov 2011 06:47:15 GMT Original-Received: from abhmt119.oracle.com (abhmt119.oracle.com [141.146.116.71]) by acsmt357.oracle.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with ESMTP id pA86l9Ub028726; Tue, 8 Nov 2011 00:47:10 -0600 Original-Received: from dradamslap1 (/10.159.62.221) by default (Oracle Beehive Gateway v4.0) with ESMTP ; Mon, 07 Nov 2011 22:47:09 -0800 X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 11 In-Reply-To: <5DC47C873F1B444AA60B3D2EC2467A57@us.oracle.com> Thread-Index: AcydwmdY589uIisnTsmeGezkHHnrtwAFhkJwAACNdIA= X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.6109 X-Source-IP: ucsinet21.oracle.com [156.151.31.93] X-CT-RefId: str=0001.0A090207.4EB8D076.015C,ss=1,re=0.000,fgs=0 X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.11 Precedence: list Resent-Date: Tue, 08 Nov 2011 01:51:01 -0500 X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 2) X-Received-From: 140.186.70.43 X-BeenThere: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org List-Id: "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.bugs:53685 Archived-At: OK, I downloaded the latest (non-pretest) Windows binary that Christophe just published (dated 11/07). I started Emacs with my setup, as usual, and ran into a straightforward problem at startup - one I can easily take care of, but I would like to know first whether I should (confirmation). I redefine `switch-to-buffer' in my code so that it autofits the frame to the buffer content. My redefinition (so far) keeps the original (Emacs 20...23) signature, however: (switch-to-buffer BUFFER &optional NORECORD) The latest Emacs binary has a new version of `find-file' that calls the new `switch-to-buffer', passing 3 args. Obviously that barfs with my redef. This is the backtrace (from byte-compiled code, but it seems clear enough) at startup: ---------8<---------------- Debugger entered--Lisp error: (wrong-number-of-arguments #[(buffer &optional norecord) "..." [buffer orig-buf norecord autofit-frames-flag get-buffer-create other-buffer window-dedicated-p selected-window switch-to-buffer-other-window old-switch-to-buffer one-window-p t fit-frame] 3 "Select buffer BUFFER in current window, unless the window is dedicated. If current window is dedicated (`window-dedicated-p'), then another window is used. BUFFER may be a buffer, a string (a buffer name), or nil. If BUFFER is a string that does not identify an existing buffer, then a new buffer with that name is created. If BUFFER is nil, then function `other-buffer' is used to choose a buffer. Optional second arg NORECORD non-nil means do not put BUFFER at the front of the list of recently selected buffers. The buffer switched to is returned. *WARNING*: This is NOT the way to work on another buffer temporarily within a Lisp program! Use `set-buffer' instead, to avoid messing with correspondences between windows and buffers. Resize frame to fit sole window if `autofit-frames-flag' (unless BUFFER is already the `current-buffer')." (list (read-buffer "Switch to buffer: " (if (fboundp (quote another-buffer)) (another-buffer nil t) (other-buffer (current-buffer)))))] 3) switch-to-buffer(# nil force-same-window) find-file("c:/drews-lisp-20") command-line-1(("C:\\drews-lisp-20")) command-line() normal-top-level() ---------8<---------------- This is how I start Emacs (which explains the `find-file' call): C:\emacs\...\bin\runemacs.exe --debug-init "C:\drews-lisp-20" Is this really the way things will be? If so, I will add an Emacs 24+ version of my redefinition of `switch-to-buffer'. But it's worth asking first, since until now Emacs 24 has seemed to work OK without that, and the development of 24 seems to be volatile still. It's hard to know what is here to stay and what is tentative, what is a feature and what is a bug. Even the latest pretest, from a week ago (10/31) has a single-arg call to `switch-to-buffer' in `find-file'. --- BTW, I see that you keep `pop-up-windows', and use it in `switch-to-buffer-other-window', but you eliminated the parallel construction, using `pop-up-frames', for `switch-to-buffer-other-frame'. Not very elegant, is it? What used to be simple and symmetric is now quite kludgy, no? Why is `pop-up-windows' still blessed but `pop-up-frames' verboten?