Re: completion-list-mode-map

[Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca>]

>> I agree that one function `quit-window' should be enough,
>> but I also think that "undisplaying" a buffer should be
>> customizable like displaying a buffer, so users could customize
>> a variable like `quit-window-alist' to restore the old behavior of
>> `quit-window' and to modify the new behavior of `quit-restore-window'
>> (renamed to `quit-window').

I tend to think that the behavior of quit-window can be specified when
displaying the buffer and/or creating the window, so that quit-window
does not require any buffer-specific customization.
But I could be persuaded otherwise, given some clear examples.

>> This also requires to change its function signature to `(quit-window
>> &optional WINDOW SPECIFIERS)'.

I don't see how this follows: quit-window is a command.  The few rare
times it's called from Elisp aren't important enough to warrant such
a change.

> I'd appreciate that, too. See bug#4550, where Stefan didn't express much
> sympathy for this, but let's hope he can be persuaded otherwise when
> more people voice their support.

As mentioned at a few other occasions, I'm fine with adding some kind of
bury-buffer-function that lets the user control whether to iconify or
delete a dedicated frame (or do something else entirely).
I'm just waiting for someone (e.g. Drew) to write the patch.


        Stefan