From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Drew Adams Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: RE: Documenting buffer display Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2018 07:04:01 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <0900cd2f-cc4e-45ab-8da1-519bd3b75576@default> References: <5BCB1D82.3020108@gmx.at> <834ldgvjmj.fsf@gnu.org> <5BCB6DAE.30209@gmx.at> <83mur7tq4f.fsf@gnu.org> <5BCD92FF.8070905@gmx.at> <838t2qt79v.fsf@gnu.org> <5BCE21AC.6030904@gmx.at> <831s8hu6i8.fsf@gnu.org> <5BCEE2B5.9090205@gmx.at> NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1540303364 7073 195.159.176.226 (23 Oct 2018 14:02:44 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2018 14:02:44 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: martin rudalics , Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Oct 23 16:02:40 2018 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1gExGa-0001iM-9M for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 23 Oct 2018 16:02:40 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:41573 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gExIg-00062i-M7 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 23 Oct 2018 10:04:50 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:34452) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gExIL-0005xT-VU for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 23 Oct 2018 10:04:36 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gExI6-0004FK-1F for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 23 Oct 2018 10:04:27 -0400 Original-Received: from userp2130.oracle.com ([156.151.31.86]:53006) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gExHz-00046K-Cr; Tue, 23 Oct 2018 10:04:07 -0400 Original-Received: from pps.filterd (userp2130.oracle.com [127.0.0.1]) by userp2130.oracle.com (8.16.0.22/8.16.0.22) with SMTP id w9NDruWd095029; Tue, 23 Oct 2018 14:04:03 GMT DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=oracle.com; h=mime-version : message-id : date : from : sender : to : cc : subject : references : in-reply-to : content-type : content-transfer-encoding; s=corp-2018-07-02; bh=Se37iqdTZ8Gc+xxnBBX8zUy1BBPRGgybgRUPYiPxRf0=; b=dFJ/IqfwOnEhP62MlNKODHKpp94KvYO5QnCdVhMf1CORDlHMl0EIgfPSz7+nltW8WWDx IKbmYRItt0A5+S2t7em2tPieCkFaKpabH8slkHuXkOr7eDFbna9AXWwHjRDHTSWXBf9T AWd9gG7kmOhuihkm2f2RRfsYz4EFavlTRDny3DCo6e7Oq/WGzDuyl2yA5cHRngpMW6JK Tq25m8f6zEfnxd4kUvp9JSpL3ZTmjLY4fkQyBZVntqJREYY6HzObZIcOKyY1Hy+fvvoH uLskcgpGRg+b3RuwxRF2zMWm8MOQ25a8oYSG/H0t/d4/k3/rOEriA1fsX6iR8LXpXuA6 Gw== Original-Received: from userv0022.oracle.com (userv0022.oracle.com [156.151.31.74]) by userp2130.oracle.com with ESMTP id 2n7usu5gmf-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Tue, 23 Oct 2018 14:04:03 +0000 Original-Received: from userv0121.oracle.com (userv0121.oracle.com [156.151.31.72]) by userv0022.oracle.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id w9NE43XX007504 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Tue, 23 Oct 2018 14:04:03 GMT Original-Received: from abhmp0018.oracle.com (abhmp0018.oracle.com [141.146.116.24]) by userv0121.oracle.com (8.14.4/8.13.8) with ESMTP id w9NE42HL008149; Tue, 23 Oct 2018 14:04:02 GMT In-Reply-To: <5BCEE2B5.9090205@gmx.at> X-Priority: 3 X-Mailer: Oracle Beehive Extensions for Outlook 2.0.1.9.1 (1003210) [OL 16.0.4756.0 (x86)] X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=nai engine=5900 definitions=9054 signatures=668683 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 suspectscore=0 malwarescore=0 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 mlxscore=0 mlxlogscore=999 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1807170000 definitions=main-1810230114 X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 156.151.31.86 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:230582 Archived-At: > I did not object to your changes when you made them because with Drew > such objections inevitably lead to discussions why 'display-buffer' > does it all wrong and why its earlier behavior was so much superior. Seriously? This is what the discussion has devolved to? I object to this personal characterization - which borders on ad hominem attack. I never said anything about `display-buffer' getting anything wrong, let alone getting it all wrong. And I never said that its earlier behavior was so much superior, or even that it was superior, or even that it was as good. On the contrary, several times, including more than once in the current discussion, I've thanked you for the work you've done on `display-buffer' and its doc. It is an improvement that users have more fine-grained control over buffer display. I think I've been quite clear about this. The points I made that you might want to characterize as objections are (1) the doc can use some improvement (and your trying to improve it now is a good thing, not a bad thing) and (2) I would like to see the simple conveniences of `pop-to-frames' and `special-display-*' continue to be supported and not discouraged. If someone can't make such points without being branded in the way you just did then there is little hope for a constructive discussion. Do you want only an echo chamber, or do you welcome input that might help even if it might disagree with your point of view in some regards? > Then why do we have all this dispute about 'display-buffer'? > According to the majority of people because its documentation is > confusing, wrong, incomplete, implicit, arcane or just bad. Dunno whether it is a majority, but it's helpful that you agree that this is a difficulty for at least some of us. (And I've never doubted that you agree about this. I know you recognize that this stuff is complicated - in both behavior and explanation/doc.) I, for one, am still at the state of being relatively confused and ignorant. I can't say that anything in the doc is incorrect. I expect that attempts to clarify it are worthwhile, and I applaud them. That's all. FWIW, though I generally agree that the Emacs manuals are mostly reference, we (Emacs generally, whether officially or not) could use some more tutorial-like presentations of using the various features provided by `display-buffer'. It is a powerful, complicated construct, and its various possibilities deserve more lead-you-by-the-hand exposure. Somewhere. Blogs, whatever, wherever. Common use cases presented and explicated. That's one opinion. The same thing is true for other complex areas, some of which I've mentioned. It wouldn't hurt to have additional material out there that helps people to better understand `display-buffer'. I'm not saying that this is something that you guys need to do. I'm saying only that it is an area where Emacs users could use more help, I think. I think you might agree about this. Hardly a day goes by, that one or more questions related to this don't appear on Emacs Stack Exchange or Reddit, for example. And when I say `display-buffer' I include questions about windows: placement, which buffers, etc.