From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Leo Liu Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#13594: 24.2.92; [PATCH] compilation-start doesn't consider nil OUTWIN Date: Sun, 17 Nov 2013 13:18:44 +0800 Message-ID: References: <87sj5apclq.fsf@mail.jurta.org> <87r4ktoinh.fsf@mail.jurta.org> <87mwvhxehw.fsf@mail.jurta.org> <87zjzfz0nq.fsf@mail.jurta.org> <51161554.9010609@gmx.at> <8738x4o5cp.fsf@mail.jurta.org> <5117D9B5.5090203@gmx.at> <87pq07b4k4.fsf@mail.jurta.org> <51192ADD.9010607@gmx.at> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1384665562 8233 80.91.229.3 (17 Nov 2013 05:19:22 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 17 Nov 2013 05:19:22 +0000 (UTC) Cc: 13594@debbugs.gnu.org To: Stefan Monnier Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sun Nov 17 06:19:26 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 1VhulZ-00082k-6C for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Sun, 17 Nov 2013 06:19:25 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:38030 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1VhulY-0003hF-Fy for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Sun, 17 Nov 2013 00:19:24 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:38121) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1VhulO-0003er-Ca for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 17 Nov 2013 00:19:21 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1VhulC-0002a5-3p for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 17 Nov 2013 00:19:14 -0500 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.43]:43824) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1VhulB-0002Zx-WE for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 17 Nov 2013 00:19:02 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1VhulB-0007Aa-Iy for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 17 Nov 2013 00:19:01 -0500 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Leo Liu Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Sun, 17 Nov 2013 05:19:01 +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=B13594.138466553727549 (code B ref 13594); Sun, 17 Nov 2013 05:19:01 +0000 Original-Received: (at 13594) by debbugs.gnu.org; 17 Nov 2013 05:18:57 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:57843 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1Vhul6-0007AH-RJ for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 17 Nov 2013 00:18:56 -0500 Original-Received: from mail-pa0-f42.google.com ([209.85.220.42]:51883) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1Vhul4-0007A2-RT for 13594@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 17 Nov 2013 00:18:55 -0500 Original-Received: by mail-pa0-f42.google.com with SMTP id kx10so4602352pab.1 for <13594@debbugs.gnu.org>; Sat, 16 Nov 2013 21:18:49 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=from:to:cc:subject:references:face:date:in-reply-to:message-id :user-agent:mime-version:content-type; bh=vk2sph7rk5NIUAHninJXjC9d/gej7w/Bw8JquW8N6aQ=; b=KMpbGvprTfKS1aWYfCdnqy3qa94Bbbp6s0xnyN8le47VzE3CeQCUA5jQIKVux1/y/8 PG9djmaxgzFA0c4Q0pGkaJ4v0cIZqwIUARlAxZyg7Gsunaqce3x5/SB70pPhRPAu4Yal /DdJf6GS4X+FYDGzjB38CXsUDOepA+QDNKW2ghC4ddgWd37+SQORKuiqgMA7p+vx7ArM UJgGMT2XHADbQvJdU9FrqbEBHbqTu4LH+XKoANYjZ27GMe2bMvgISeMGRKYTLa1fomjy quIp7u4ZQco8sE/vgSHX5v52C2hAeQDm9xDOTMPGi2F2B7h6Xgu1oAUzPA/xrKvl9vGf /zdQ== X-Received: by 10.68.232.37 with SMTP id tl5mr7046135pbc.86.1384665529138; Sat, 16 Nov 2013 21:18:49 -0800 (PST) Original-Received: from localhost ([221.220.232.204]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id xe9sm16721700pab.0.2013.11.16.21.18.47 for (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Sat, 16 Nov 2013 21:18:48 -0800 (PST) Face: iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAACgAAAAoBAMAAAB+0KVeAAAAMFBMVEUaFRZLMy1dTENxVzKQ WiCrXQ97cmO/dSqSh3akjGTApXy5sJ7Sxo/Sz8Xo6eP9//xJbkruAAAAAWJLR0QAiAUdSAAAAAlw SFlzAAACxQAAAsUBidZ/7wAAAAd0SU1FB9cBBwMJOwHXewoAAAIBSURBVCjPVdNBiNNAFADQ6J4F x3hThHZBBC+WCFI8SS0iezRDcMHLHkLAg6gJH/fgYQ9xYlj2sLK4KHgqCgXFhda2Idmr4kkQPZQ0 nkQMbTypbMmMM2m7ZgYSmMef/5OZPwo7HFnx3uKPcmj0Dht1LWZJ+Hvr7dIFZXRUwl9VRTuuKDJ+ U44gjscknK4hhJaCkYRsWjmBtLqXlJAG2wipNe18OZJu1BBq1E8xafl4s6Jq2mUZGftU1y7CCxnp FVUDWJXx4C66BKBnErbuoaYNtoRTu6EZBsCbMn7W+5qOAR6WvxNOby9jHWC9hAf3n304CdiAByXs 3Nh9roLDkyb/sWV712vYwaLSAn8CPMHIAAzOPDKP2COAFm4Y4ODVWc6xG7KXsN7UeUJjjimx2uwd gCgNhr0i8C/xyCD5CiCKAMY3Bf5oDzx//w/fimscdcAZU2jv9sedx6+nYPPFIoWI/GK6QZ+EFGOR ErAjCnV3vPZ7XqlTIMbOLY7fLcvvmT7rXNWaGDexIY44N12TG2PDp7vqyl57dnCeuWwyNpnEURxk fTbDYeBnKRn4oejPYI4sH6WviBumEZ/GxX4X/x6EcURFZ7E071bjQGAxpcOAEOJuTiroDEea5Szv rVWLYfl7ZiQwSUToxrkux7OLixAWGz22+HIyWTRYcVfomOwvzusfjtVIGgLHf3MAAAAASUVORK5C YII= In-Reply-To: (Stefan Monnier's message of "Wed, 20 Mar 2013 08:51:52 -0400") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.3 (OS X 10.9) 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:80675 Archived-At: On 2013-03-20 20:51 +0800, Stefan Monnier wrote: > That's one possibility, yes. Tho adding an argument doesn't sound > much fun. So I'd prefer if it could be passed via ACTION. I have read this bug thread again. I am confused by this decision. Why do we want to tell display-buffer to do nothing (via ACTION or extra arg) when we can choose not to call it? Isn't not calling it better? Leo