From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: martin rudalics Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#13594: Planning Emacs-24.4 Date: Mon, 18 Nov 2013 16:32:25 +0100 Message-ID: <528A3309.4080300@gmx.at> References: <5289F003.5040708@gmx.at> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1384788798 22437 80.91.229.3 (18 Nov 2013 15:33:18 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 18 Nov 2013 15:33:18 +0000 (UTC) Cc: 13594@debbugs.gnu.org, Leo Liu To: Stefan Monnier Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Nov 18 16:33:22 2013 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1ViQpE-0007hq-Pl for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Mon, 18 Nov 2013 16:33:20 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:44478 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ViQpE-0002Fu-9H for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Mon, 18 Nov 2013 10:33:20 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:52279) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ViQp4-00026a-4s for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 18 Nov 2013 10:33:17 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ViQow-00039v-Jy for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 18 Nov 2013 10:33:10 -0500 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.43]:46211) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ViQow-00039o-HN for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 18 Nov 2013 10:33:02 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1ViQow-0003im-2S for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 18 Nov 2013 10:33:02 -0500 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: martin rudalics Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Mon, 18 Nov 2013 15:33:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 13594 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: patch Original-Received: via spool by 13594-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B13594.138478876114274 (code B ref 13594); Mon, 18 Nov 2013 15:33:02 +0000 Original-Received: (at 13594) by debbugs.gnu.org; 18 Nov 2013 15:32:41 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:60230 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1ViQob-0003i9-Al for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 18 Nov 2013 10:32:41 -0500 Original-Received: from mout.gmx.net ([212.227.15.19]:56910) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1ViQoY-0003hv-SO for 13594@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 18 Nov 2013 10:32:39 -0500 Original-Received: from [62.47.55.138] ([62.47.55.138]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx103) with ESMTPA (Nemesis) id 0MV6PJ-1WCQxx34ZB-00YNWx for <13594@debbugs.gnu.org>; Mon, 18 Nov 2013 16:32:32 +0100 In-Reply-To: X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:HW8WDOQxVSNfDavzXEwEPEHfxEwTa5z7I/1tMFxHY/8E/hs7Sg3 fDuurMNoMLtkqHezC4+6wlU0ib28380sYQ9B98iVMxPR7Ijjsc4TEHnBk4RCHViSBtRF5Oe Y+AAnbpbeDgv+m+dD/a0QIa9G0RK/qIf28kcel5qnOETnadaVnzPbpaK6rCiAZO2hxpcS6t mwAehwTa/fx9n1J3AI5ow== X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 3.x 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:80734 Archived-At: > AFAICT, display-buffer does already try pretty hard. I think that if > display-buffer returns nil in a context where may-fail is nil, it's not > a bug in display-buffer but in some of the ACTIONS, and I see no reason > why `display-buffer' should try and cover up the problem. Fully agreed. I just misunderstood the intentions of the patch. martin