Re: frames dedicated to buffers, or, always see specific buffers in a specific frame

[martin rudalics <rudalics@gmx.at>]

 >> So for making this general purpose you should use `pop-to-buffer'
 >> instead of `display-buffer'.
 >
 > Yes, that works too. Why exactly is this more general purpose?

I meant that if you really want to use this as a subtitute for
`switch-to-buffer' you should make sure the window and frame get
selected.  They don't necessarily using `display-buffer' alone.

 >  Also, ido has these `ido-default-buffer-method' and
 > `ido-default-file-method' that can be set to various options to
 > control how buffer appears.
 >
 > But the way these options implemented does not bring them all to
 > `display-buffer', which sometimes precludes user's control. Should't
 > they be implemented via `display-buffer-alist', keeping any of the
 > user's entries on top?

Doesn't setting `ido-default-buffer-method' to `display' work?  Maybe we
could add `pop-to-buffer' to the default methods.

 > Pity. But what about making `switch-to-buffer' delegate to
 > `display-buffer' too? It could dinamically bind `display-buffer-alist'
 > to display and select the buffer, but keeping any existing entries
 > (probably set by the user, or other programs) on top.
 >
 > If that resulted in `switch-to-buffer' not switching to the buffer's
 > window, it could not be considered unexpected behaviour, since
 > ultimately the user set `display-buffer-alist' himself.

The basic idea of the `switch-to-buffer' functions is to bypass the
`display-buffer' customizations.  That is, by default you display a
buffer in a certain manner but always can use `switch-to-buffer' to
override that default behavior.

martin