From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: martin rudalics Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Documenting buffer display Date: Sun, 21 Oct 2018 10:22:14 +0200 Message-ID: <5BCC3736.1010305@gmx.at> References: <5BCB1D82.3020108@gmx.at> <969a77ef-233b-428f-bf08-dba31d7cb895@default> <5BCB6DC7.50800@gmx.at> <10ed3b66-ca9d-4431-8a56-0b1f10ebc799@default> NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1540110039 22952 195.159.176.226 (21 Oct 2018 08:20:39 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 21 Oct 2018 08:20:39 +0000 (UTC) To: Drew Adams , emacs-devel Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sun Oct 21 10:20:35 2018 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1gE8yR-0005rY-1g for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 21 Oct 2018 10:20:35 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:57964 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gE90X-00044u-A0 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 21 Oct 2018 04:22:45 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:49955) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gE90O-0003wd-DH for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 21 Oct 2018 04:22:37 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gE90I-0005Ma-Mv for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 21 Oct 2018 04:22:36 -0400 Original-Received: from mout.gmx.net ([212.227.15.19]:39811) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gE90E-0005Jc-GL for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 21 Oct 2018 04:22:27 -0400 Original-Received: from [192.168.1.101] ([46.125.250.51]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx003 [212.227.17.190]) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0M1n4s-1fLuYE3h0s-00tns5; Sun, 21 Oct 2018 10:22:17 +0200 Original-Received: from [192.168.1.101] ([46.125.250.51]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx003 [212.227.17.190]) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0M1n4s-1fLuYE3h0s-00tns5; Sun, 21 Oct 2018 10:22:17 +0200 In-Reply-To: <10ed3b66-ca9d-4431-8a56-0b1f10ebc799@default> X-Provags-ID: V03:K1:5+0zI+5IT+07hKypMMWwBcaUzffKO5dLAB37HT2NRjyYgDBJ7nu y1fTa0agUSER3TsE4idwe5GKFl8Lgd5eqLrdfXIeAeqZj/wZ5JyRrzJpfSvy9PBorIP/VyC q+WWe+Qh+S6gXLc8GM1WfVgZTRA66Fg7eW8yM88kg8gEdOYHmaG6JuJmNXaLOf6OyzjeAk7 1Xg7sEs9T/stZPwd0munQ== X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V01:K0:ZwRugbMgiko=:YQp32g4zPYFQplZF3AWx3b FVrndEgG6VU7mmYuSONmIv//9i2R0zlvEcQiHt9XtAKRZ5JQT7N3wBswkF/dvFfRGvn8/vgYp S0/ptjlSePfsCWC2o2/TguOY0QMGIwOG1x+2V9EbQonpcmFzKRcmU3wGWH9ITa0Gu2NuYPKoI Yy+duMwt1G9yVBtXOmyGPbaljHdgSwYnMTLhP3JYXnVD6+q3pO3N25gopY9DRwLDzWcF09ESu ts4EbYf7AJ89Lj4gscfsKKYT64ryZQvrz7TtwuC2Netwj0Iz5udSqZr1Av259DQ9pGLfV8itt yfmOgbMpLdJSgd0pxqzRkZL244Z6PszH3bQm0O3qvErLm/aGqzRM+rcL+0tfpweS5V6rNxnyl lVTaqOH9GwY1hapPxLgPBdbf5r+IPm22XkXiTOnpwbWtuSrZtq6S/dZyV7HIgc9KbHxkh5Pam ugc0rymA72HBzUTJT3mguEl6gqdx/IRJFFdE1X4f98qPyG+CcDVCgomPicjL0V/9R6MROyd5o kGF7U9LgP3CMrUcjhFP2YqtJUocCA/WFe8H9b1fY4xuThgIDg9HI+jio3fsLYtAHo4VjEN69Q l2bH72W2mWaQQTGi7KlDh4Q3SrT1bPKAWzRBEkYVzJk7vehMoWFIl/Ux0N74oLbQuoXH8DKcr pnPvH/xIrIwP1Yvey+Y3HLz/MGac2as63r84BgsJrggzjnRbYYLXAL3fIgHPZTdlG8XUtp4Kr WxNn5pHwWJ759RTsIHJ+ybnZ0cm2f90NbLanuyEGly7RhsoVpl+V5Y7R+hAgIEZnsjCX/YVc X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 212.227.15.19 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:230537 Archived-At: > I disagree. If the behavior is documented in the command's doc > string, as it should be, then the user is aware of it. Using a given > command is a user choice. There is no reason to put on the hair > shirt of not binding a user option in a user command, as long as > the behavior is documented and the command ends always by > restoring the user's preferred value for the option. A user option has to be respected. If the designer of a command sees no other way to have a command do what it is supposed to do than by overriding a user option we have a severe design problem. 'display-buffer' has no design problem because programmers can always ask it to do what they want by specifying the ACTION argument appropriately. Telling programmers to bind a user option instead is an invitation to bad design. > Secondly, users themselves define commands, and the ability > to bind such a variable - whether it is an option or not, is very > useful for users. And when such users become programmers we get our problems through the backdoor, compare the recent "open bookmark in other frame" thread. martin