From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#59381: Should xref--marker-ring be per-window? Date: Sun, 20 Nov 2022 09:59:25 +0200 Message-ID: <83v8na5a5e.fsf@gnu.org> References: <86leo6ai85.fsf@mail.linkov.net> <83leo67mbt.fsf@gnu.org> Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="4165"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: 59381@debbugs.gnu.org, ackerleytng@gmail.com, juri@linkov.net To: Dmitry Gutov Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Sun Nov 20 09:00:22 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 1owfFW-0000tN-19 for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Sun, 20 Nov 2022 09:00:22 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1owfFM-0001P3-DQ; Sun, 20 Nov 2022 03:00:12 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1owfFC-0001OP-MV for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 20 Nov 2022 03:00:03 -0500 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1owfFC-0006T7-7F for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 20 Nov 2022 03:00:02 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1owfFC-0002Jc-2z for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 20 Nov 2022 03:00:02 -0500 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Eli Zaretskii Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Sun, 20 Nov 2022 08:00:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 59381 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs Original-Received: via spool by 59381-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B59381.16689311658828 (code B ref 59381); Sun, 20 Nov 2022 08:00:02 +0000 Original-Received: (at 59381) by debbugs.gnu.org; 20 Nov 2022 07:59:25 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:42270 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1owfEa-0002IK-LW for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 20 Nov 2022 02:59:25 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:55784) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1owfEY-0002I6-FJ for 59381@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 20 Nov 2022 02:59:23 -0500 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1owfES-0006Nn-LE; Sun, 20 Nov 2022 02:59:16 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gnu.org; s=fencepost-gnu-org; h=References:Subject:In-Reply-To:To:From:Date: mime-version; bh=t9fiMaeyWlhQN5BF7BX9kcdd6wbZEjv7Z+bBW1GL6q8=; b=lbaytpY6rtT4 CZsP7q7Ccff3TbdR71zoF73hnR75f1SX6WMJfMwjUMOv+TgdoR7otLVNR2HntMvsO1JL4N7Vt6AQy xRvsfaQXj8n6xAPES2YBc23uh41CjCqMhAaw9O3LYNzN3NwJQOkeHw/5SQWqHkDHSZ48xAgfid5rE Z01m5aHdHEXnrQ8jlZqlDejk8J45vfmCYaIMtx/bLFsfrKbZWzCh90/fDHlZMrJk4U7zm+fkNLv8h bdWNuWpI2mf75/VwTT1lvhsmeq1qOwLF6qn79rkXKCVCpv1xJZ3RcvGaiVe0QcqhAWrIhOQiFPnHr 0LQ+ZL5oTAD3uscGrCzuaA==; Original-Received: from [87.69.77.57] (helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1owfES-0006Jn-1b; Sun, 20 Nov 2022 02:59:16 -0500 In-Reply-To: (message from Dmitry Gutov on Sun, 20 Nov 2022 04:52:38 +0200) 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-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.bugs:248402 Archived-At: > Date: Sun, 20 Nov 2022 04:52:38 +0200 > Cc: ackerleytng@gmail.com, 59381@debbugs.gnu.org > From: Dmitry Gutov > > > My guess is that the OP wanted to have control on when M-. pushes locations to > > the last used stack or begin a new stack. Because only the user knows when > > M-. begins a new series of searches. So I think it is better to offer a > > separate command for exercising just such control. > > As previously mentioned in > https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=38797#8, I personally find > it perfectly usable to always use window-local stacks. > > But maybe it will be helpful for you to elaborate: what the workflow > would look like. Would it be a parallel set of commands, or simply a > command to... do what? I just did that, above: add a command that starts a new "stack". All the rest is unchanged. > In my workflow, a new stack is more or less created implicitly by > splitting a window, and discarded by deleting one. So you always ever have a given buffer displayed in a single window? Does it ever happen to you that you need to work on one portion of a file while looking at its another portion? or work on one file while look at another file in a sibling window? If you ever need to do these, and both windows show files that belong to the same "editing activity", why would the stack be local to a window? That would effectively designate a single window as the only one where M-. and M-, will do what you expect, no? > The older stacks can get forgotten, but while the locations are fresh in > mind, this behavior feels logical: it *feels* that I did that chain of > navigations in one window, and another in the other one. And I can jump > back and forward in each one in parallel. But not if you switch windows? > I suppose it doesn't work as well when commands pop new windows a lot, > but luckily M-. doesn't do that too often. In your experience, maybe. In Emacs we have macros like FOO_BAR that call functions named foo_bar, and then M-. always pops up a new window. Likewise with macros or data structures that have several different definitions depending on the window-system backend (X, w32, NS, etc.). The use cases I described don't work well with window-local stacks. So if an explicit command as I envisioned is deemed an annoyance, perhaps a user option which will allow one or the other workflow is in order?