Re: Buffer listing in multiple frames/ttys

[lorentey@elte.hu (Lőrentey Károly)]

Drew Adams <drew.adams@oracle.com> writes:
> Function `buffer-list' (which supplies the buffer list to
> list-buffers-noselect') lists all buffers - it just puts those for the
> given frame first. So, this change makes the buffer-menu order be
> different, depending on what frame you call it from.

Yes.  The list still contains all the buffers, but the buffers that
were recently displayed in the current frame are listed first.

> For people, like me, who use pop-up-frames = t, this means that the
> order is usually different, depending on what _buffer_ you call it
> from.

That's true.  Although the newly created frame is initialized with the
global buffer-list, `list-buffers' populates the list using the old
frame's local version.

> I can live with that reordering behavior, I guess. But, it might be
> best if, as before, the same order were used for the buffer menu,
> regardless of which frame you call it from. I'm not sure about that
> (hence, "might be") - what do others think?

Well, it might be question a personal preference.  I usually sort my
frames thematically (one for email, one for coding, etc), so a local
buffer list makes much more sense.  It also seems like the only
reasonable behaviour in a multi-display environment.  

The iswitchb package has a similar case, and it provides the
iswitchb-use-frame-buffer-list variable to let the user decide.

Is the reordering really inconvenient with pop-up-frames, or is it
just surprising at first?

> I'm also curious how this change actually fixes the problem reported
> for tty - doesn't function `buffer-list' still list all buffers, so
> that all get listed in the buffer menu? I don't see where the code
> does anything different for the tty case.

AFAICS the submitter only wanted a local ordering; he did not want to
eliminate references to buffers on other displays.

-- 
Károly