From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Chong Yidong Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: window-next-buffers Date: Sat, 26 Nov 2011 00:05:11 +0800 Message-ID: <87wraotcg8.fsf@gnu.org> References: <878vn67y0l.fsf@gnu.org> <4ECE159F.8080300@gmx.at> <8739dduz0q.fsf@mail.jurta.org> <4ECF6AD1.1070807@gmx.at> <87zkfkqynp.fsf@mail.jurta.org> <87mxbkp78m.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1322237140 32152 80.91.229.12 (25 Nov 2011 16:05:40 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 25 Nov 2011 16:05:40 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Juri Linkov , martin rudalics , emacs-devel@gnu.org To: "Stephen J. Turnbull" Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Nov 25 17:05:35 2011 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([140.186.70.17]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1RTyHO-0000Zj-PJ for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 25 Nov 2011 17:05:34 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:51955 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RTyHO-0002Rr-5s for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 25 Nov 2011 11:05:34 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]:51472) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RTyHK-0002Ra-Hv for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 25 Nov 2011 11:05:31 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RTyHE-0004yY-Ml for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 25 Nov 2011 11:05:30 -0500 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([140.186.70.10]:33060) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RTyHE-0004yU-LF for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 25 Nov 2011 11:05:24 -0500 Original-Received: from bb121-6-203-164.singnet.com.sg ([121.6.203.164]:53501 helo=furball) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RTyHC-0003eH-9s; Fri, 25 Nov 2011 11:05:23 -0500 In-Reply-To: <87mxbkp78m.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> (Stephen J. Turnbull's message of "Sat, 26 Nov 2011 00:11:21 +0900") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.0.91 (gnu/linux) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 3) X-Received-From: 140.186.70.10 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 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-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:146237 Archived-At: "Stephen J. Turnbull" writes: > Juri Linkov writes: > > > IIUC this means that a set of next-buffers is a subset of > > prev-buffers. > > Actually, I suspect it means that Yidong was right when he suggested a > ring. Butnevermind.... No, I was wrong: a ring isn't a good fit for the design, in which `switch-to-prev-buffer' (i) switches to the previous buffers displayed in the buffer, and (ii) after successive `switch-to-prev-buffer's reach the end of that list, the command moves on to other buffers in the buffer list which the window hadn't visited before. If we used a ring, we'd never hit the end, so we'd never move on to (ii). But I think the next-buffers list should be considered an internal detail (i.e. internal to the workings of next-buffer/previous-buffer), and shouldn't be documented in the Lisp manual.