Suggestion for C-u M-x shell

Suggestion for C-u M-x shell

[Markus Rost]

To run several shells in Emacs, one uses

C-u M-x shell

which prompts for a buffer name with "*shell*" as default.  However
for that name it would be enough to just call M-x shell without a
prefix.  What about suggesting a new unused buffer name in the prompt?
That would come in handy for starting a new shell.  What do people
think?

Here is a patch for this.

	* shell.el (shell): With prefix-arg, suggest a new buffer name.

===Buffer *diff*============================================
cd /home/rost/cvs/emacs/lisp/
diff -c /home/rost/cvs/emacs/lisp/shell.el /tmp/buffer-content-6992R3d
*** /home/rost/cvs/emacs/lisp/shell.el	Thu Jun 12 18:20:49 2003
--- /tmp/buffer-content-6992R3d	Mon Aug 11 12:43:33 2003
***************
*** 533,539 ****
    (interactive
     (list
      (and current-prefix-arg
! 	 (read-buffer "Shell buffer: " "*shell*"))))
    (setq buffer (get-buffer-create (or buffer "*shell*")))
    ;; Pop to buffer, so that the buffer's window will be correctly set
    ;; when we call comint (so that comint sets the COLUMNS env var properly).
--- 533,540 ----
    (interactive
     (list
      (and current-prefix-arg
! 	 (read-buffer "Shell buffer: "
! 		      (generate-new-buffer-name "*shell*")))))
    (setq buffer (get-buffer-create (or buffer "*shell*")))
    ;; Pop to buffer, so that the buffer's window will be correctly set
    ;; when we call comint (so that comint sets the COLUMNS env var properly).

Diff finished at Mon Aug 11 12:43:34
============================================================

Re: Suggestion for C-u M-x shell

[Richard Stallman]

I agree that is an improvement.  Please install it.

However, I would recommend that someone rename the first shell buffer
with M-x rename-uniquely and then do M-x shell with no arguments.
That method works for all sorts of special buffers and is easier to
remember.

Re: Suggestion for C-u M-x shell

[Miles Bader]

Richard Stallman <rms@gnu.org> writes:
> However, I would recommend that someone rename the first shell buffer
> with M-x rename-uniquely and then do M-x shell with no arguments.
> That method works for all sorts of special buffers and is easier to
> remember.

This is true, but in practice it's quite annoying if you make lots of
shell buffers (which I do).  [In contrast, I rarely rename other special
buffers, so I can deal with the annoyance with them.]

-Miles
-- 
Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum viditur.