From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "Richard M. Stallman" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Buffer listing in multiple frames/ttys Date: Mon, 05 Dec 2005 20:43:29 -0500 Message-ID: References: <87wtinrypp.fsf@jurta.org> <87u0dqm5ta.fsf@jurta.org> Reply-To: rms@gnu.org NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15 X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1133833641 30958 80.91.229.2 (6 Dec 2005 01:47:21 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 6 Dec 2005 01:47:21 +0000 (UTC) Cc: juri@jurta.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Dec 06 02:47:20 2005 Return-path: Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1EjRuj-0005ow-5A for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 06 Dec 2005 02:46:41 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1EjRut-0001mY-7A for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 05 Dec 2005 20:46:51 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1EjRsD-0000KM-Cc for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 05 Dec 2005 20:44:05 -0500 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1EjRsC-0000Jv-Dl for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 05 Dec 2005 20:44:04 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1EjRsB-0000Jm-Rp for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 05 Dec 2005 20:44:03 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.164] (helo=fencepost.gnu.org) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1EjRsm-0007o2-JN for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 05 Dec 2005 20:44:40 -0500 Original-Received: from rms by fencepost.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.34) id 1EjRrd-0000Gn-V1; Mon, 05 Dec 2005 20:43:30 -0500 Original-To: lorentey@elte.hu (=?utf-8?Q?K=C3=A1roly_L=C5=91rentey?=) In-reply-to: X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:47032 Archived-At: Right. I would say changing `bury-buffer' would be an overshoot, though. Perhaps `next-buffer' shouldn't call it? bury-buffer is the only way to put a buffer at the end of the buffer list. next-buffer must call bury-buffer in order to do that. Now, I like these definitions as it makes more sense for me to keep the buffer cycle frame-local, but they do have one disadvantage: the `next-buffer'/`prev-buffer' cycle will not usually contain all buffers---just those that were displayed in the current frame. As far as I can see, buffers that have never been displayed in this frame WILL be included. other-buffer will find them, and prev-buffer will find them via the call to buffer-list. However, I see that these functions do not find buffers that are currently displayed in some window. I think that these commands should disregard whether the buffer is visible elsewhere. That means passing t for the 2nd arg to other-buffer, and removing some code in prev-buffer.