From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: martin rudalics Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#53910: [External] : bug#53910: 29.0.50; context-menu-mode breaks help in read-only buffers Date: Sun, 20 Feb 2022 10:16:57 +0100 Message-ID: <70c9a41a-4205-bc13-48c9-86dce0d2a4e9@gmx.at> References: <20220210001600.vjiuqzoiuuzzj54c.ref@Ergus> <20220210001600.vjiuqzoiuuzzj54c@Ergus> <87mtizdwrv.fsf@gnus.org> <86y22jxfsq.fsf@mail.linkov.net> <87o83f7y3x.fsf@gnus.org> <86iltmpn0a.fsf@mail.linkov.net> <86wni13ifi.fsf@mail.linkov.net> <86pmns10kw.fsf@mail.linkov.net> <5d2c2af9-d011-583b-e9c1-985bbc2378c2@gmx.at> <861r06vbos.fsf@mail.linkov.net> <868ru9jnp6.fsf@mail.linkov.net> <41b85df6-305f-fe6b-f575-0ff9db616eb9@gmx.at> <83a6enyrdh.fsf@gnu.org> <54befa08-3bce-1d86-4e8b-e3cc4246da0b@gmx.at> <83y226ydnn.fsf@gnu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="26576"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: larsi@gnus.org, juri@linkov.net, 53910@debbugs.gnu.org, monnier@iro.umontreal.ca, spacibba@aol.com To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Sun Feb 20 10:18:24 2022 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1nLiMJ-0006id-Sj for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Sun, 20 Feb 2022 10:18:23 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:57136 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1nLiMI-0001lF-EG for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Sun, 20 Feb 2022 04:18:22 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:50674) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1nLiM0-0001kX-2f for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 20 Feb 2022 04:18:04 -0500 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]:37222) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1nLiLy-0005x8-5f for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 20 Feb 2022 04:18:03 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1nLiLy-0006b3-2p for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 20 Feb 2022 04:18:02 -0500 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: martin rudalics Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Sun, 20 Feb 2022 09:18:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 53910 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: confirmed Original-Received: via spool by 53910-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B53910.164534863225272 (code B ref 53910); Sun, 20 Feb 2022 09:18:02 +0000 Original-Received: (at 53910) by debbugs.gnu.org; 20 Feb 2022 09:17:12 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:59346 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1nLiLA-0006ZX-9d for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 20 Feb 2022 04:17:12 -0500 Original-Received: from mout.gmx.net ([212.227.17.20]:46017) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1nLiL8-0006ZH-3b for 53910@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 20 Feb 2022 04:17:10 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=gmx.net; s=badeba3b8450; t=1645348618; bh=4CyY2QAxsRQyKYH4uVCh9Xocr4THw9YQMuqC/Q/6uwk=; h=X-UI-Sender-Class:Date:Subject:To:Cc:References:From:In-Reply-To; b=Z5e7Y2bQw3zciHJ0sCOdtlyGqCNJDcLBUv0r1MopCElfhMtxj8bl0pKPl3lwBPJXB kvdbiti996Wo2h1wQUGssnIGQobEGKfPcUBpFjM1ug2nAzJldaAmtR/oxEvOKwHBzg Jf7tkOLaovAFmQFX3eJrV+LxRYuepoglARHp7cXE= X-UI-Sender-Class: 01bb95c1-4bf8-414a-932a-4f6e2808ef9c Original-Received: from [192.168.1.101] ([213.142.96.4]) by mail.gmx.net (mrgmx104 [212.227.17.168]) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 1M5fIQ-1nIzJY2Avq-007Fy0; Sun, 20 Feb 2022 10:16:58 +0100 Content-Language: en-US In-Reply-To: <83y226ydnn.fsf@gnu.org> X-Provags-ID: V03:K1:eOx9Z4aV9C+YrRoV/Qump0RPjztWI94QFUjg8tBFuqgunpa7lLB puiqqoklkWx4u3/H1yZIJKhxWyo5at5kfE86bh+6U/6o+Yap2zJiDLO93o0fMGfGdMkr3Xj OH+3Q6k40ML7qQWnAcSAlpoBtpXtqXp/O7VsJAkijYLPXIDlEzKna9Xyc6ReLOMUxETJdH5 P7HzRvfqgPhqxMakOD7cQ== X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V03:K0:yGHBhycM204=:OUQ7uKJEjMhHinbTFKj2ea PwPsbBelvBr1mcYC2Pnl3HLf5Q0UKH6pX7SJGuNoIRjAf2LnkMhiuk3j/KvEXnJ+OYGomEWNV eILwBsSanymLwn+7qejXrx1TJ/6mSGsXvFdn4RU3wz4MV71CBb6cMDFpeZD6ZNpWzv7ihQqBL XqWuuuc7KhdrLt8VhifBfyIS75nVuUl+71Ksp5FV75M3mSapYRkQlf07GdkTnkuGx/E4CwQK4 XcnSjCLxpACG58vrK6jF5bDBsBk1c0lWUmyDMc9x6JZsrmixsN//AZdJ1VXuddYlr5dWcVfQ1 qArD1SEl5FOkdyJDvcrcE5duvzX51EufV8zwT3d0YIyprEONVMC0ApzO8eFm5RZ0KirfI3bvA rMTLDIJdjem7xHAKQjD/2hlSgVy01CdPjD7LB2xlSEMKrFvElD/rEkJcRZQ7I5tF19EZo02Sp UQJL+zpabxzSdvv+AcdX6SFEiAySw0EIdmu/I42tN12Du7UUAWWvHnc+vyvnoNRnmq2ty8ozq sW0Uk7OPUn+nd2os2ps96iJJPUCx4k5jmDZ5HA1xMqTBC8nqpN9yIQ8gIx2NnNcrGbGA3dMQZ f5VLN4W1AX5jmdB7/jurICMZ2XTD66sBgOcyefdEe1NwVLsg5ON3mFwHFilZlO3cFt0ITYOMk SP2tlfobhy5JMaWi2wqeyqGJHxOzjgnqeS539QpQgQu9cKsLo7aSaWPpoc45RirQp7BmQkvdz w2lU4MLZ7TV0Nrm4jnvWXvdFjtexT4Aj59pnz4VluXcCLnF/ziNNivPOOGVi6asTWP/GVJmx X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list 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-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "bug-gnu-emacs" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.bugs:227217 Archived-At: > That bury-buffer can be mis-used or abused Do you mean that the functions I posted mis-use or abuse 'bury-buffer'? > doesn't mean it should not > be used correctly, What distinguishes a "correct use" of 'bury-buffer' from an "incorrect" one in your opinion? > especially since we do that in many places. Many of those assign 'bury-buffer' to a key (which is perfectly valid) or call it with an explicit BUFFER-OR-NAME argument (which is also valid but could avoid the extra indirection by calling 'bury-buffer-internal' right away). Problematic are calls without arguments, especially when they are wrapped in 'with-selected-window' like in 'tab-line-close-tab'. > Moreover, bury-buffer does little besides bury-buffer-internal, so I > still don't understand the emotional reaction. What's emotional about a recommendation? My I recommend against calling 'bury-buffer' in Lisp code: has to be seen in the context of Juri's Maybe (kill-buffer (window-buffer )) has the same effect when used in any window, but (bury-buffer (window-buffer )) definitely should be called in the required window, because `bury-buffer` uses `nil` for the WINDOW args, e.g.: (set-window-dedicated-p nil nil) (switch-to-prev-buffer nil 'bury) martin