[jidanni@jidanni.org: Re: emacsclient additional arguments buried]

[jidanni@jidanni.org: Re: emacsclient additional arguments buried]

[Richard Stallman]

Would someone please fix this, then ack?

------- Start of forwarded message -------
From: Dan Jacobson <jidanni@jidanni.org>
To: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org
Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2006 06:21:54 +0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Cc: bortzmeyer@debian.org
Subject: Re: emacsclient additional arguments buried
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=failed 
	version=3.0.4

>     Hurmf, emacsclient -n a b c causes the additional arguments to be
>     buried. The second argument should be right there at the
>     switch-to-buffer prompt. Additional arguments not far behind too on
>     the buffer list.

rms> I don't understand.

emacsclient works fine, except when you try it with more than one
argument. When you do that, the additional arguments after the first
end up bury-buffer'ed, whereas one might expect them near the top of
the buffer list. OK, no big deal...there is a Debian emacsclient man
page. Maybe what should happen when one gives more than one file
argument to emacsclient should be documented.


_______________________________________________
bug-gnu-emacs mailing list
bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-gnu-emacs
------- End of forwarded message -------

Re: [jidanni@jidanni.org: Re: emacsclient additional arguments buried]

[Chong Yidong]

Richard Stallman <rms@gnu.org> writes:

> Would someone please fix this, then ack?
>
> From: Dan Jacobson <jidanni@jidanni.org>
> Subject: Re: emacsclient additional arguments buried
> To: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org
> Cc: bortzmeyer@debian.org
>
>>     Hurmf, emacsclient -n a b c causes the additional arguments to be
>>     buried. The second argument should be right there at the
>>     switch-to-buffer prompt. Additional arguments not far behind too on
>>     the buffer list.
>
> rms> I don't understand.
>
> emacsclient works fine, except when you try it with more than one
> argument. When you do that, the additional arguments after the first
> end up bury-buffer'ed, whereas one might expect them near the top of
> the buffer list. OK, no big deal...there is a Debian emacsclient man
> page. Maybe what should happen when one gives more than one file
> argument to emacsclient should be documented.

What exactly needs to be done here?  If we don't want the additional
files to be buried, that is easy enough to do (one-liner patch below).
But I'm not sure that is the correct thing to do---it could be
construed as interfering with the server's buffer setup.  Note that
C-x # brings up the next client file correctly, even though they are
buried.

*** emacs/lisp/server.el.~1.112.~	2006-06-11 14:50:32.000000000 -0400
--- emacs/lisp/server.el	2006-07-04 10:10:57.000000000 -0400
***************
*** 426,432 ****
  			   (write-file filen))))
  		(setq server-existing-buffer t)
  		(server-goto-line-column file))
! 	    (set-buffer (find-file-noselect filen))
  	    (server-goto-line-column file)
  	    (run-hooks 'server-visit-hook)))
  	(unless nowait
--- 426,432 ----
  			   (write-file filen))))
  		(setq server-existing-buffer t)
  		(server-goto-line-column file))
! 	    (find-file filen)
  	    (server-goto-line-column file)
  	    (run-hooks 'server-visit-hook)))
  	(unless nowait

Re: [jidanni@jidanni.org: Re: emacsclient additional arguments buried]

[Stefan Monnier]

> ! 	    (set-buffer (find-file-noselect filen))
> --- 426,432 ----
> ! 	    (find-file filen)

Sorry, this burps here, because find-file uses switch-to-buffer which burps
if run inside a minibuffer or a dedicated window (basically all my windows
are either minibuffer-windows or dedicated).
Please *don't* use find-file (or switch-to-buffer) in elisp code.


        Stefan

Re: [jidanni@jidanni.org: Re: emacsclient additional arguments buried]

[Richard Stallman]

    What exactly needs to be done here?  If we don't want the additional
    files to be buried, that is easy enough to do (one-liner patch below).
    But I'm not sure that is the correct thing to do---it could be
    construed as interfering with the server's buffer setup.

I think he wants them to go at the front of the buffer list,
as if each one had been visited when the server asked for it.

At the same time, I can see how this might be undesirable for some
users.

Re: [jidanni@jidanni.org: Re: emacsclient additional arguments buried]

[Chong Yidong]

Richard Stallman <rms@gnu.org> writes:

>     What exactly needs to be done here?  If we don't want the additional
>     files to be buried, that is easy enough to do (one-liner patch below).
>     But I'm not sure that is the correct thing to do---it could be
>     construed as interfering with the server's buffer setup.
>
> I think he wants them to go at the front of the buffer list,
> as if each one had been visited when the server asked for it.
>
> At the same time, I can see how this might be undesirable for some
> users.

I suggest leaving the code alone, and simply mentioning this in the
manual node on "Invoking Emacsclient".  OK?

Re: [jidanni@jidanni.org: Re: emacsclient additional arguments buried]

[Richard Stallman]

    I suggest leaving the code alone, and simply mentioning this in the
    manual node on "Invoking Emacsclient".  OK?

Ok, could you do that?