Re: Dumb question #143 -- How do I get the *scratch* window back ??

Re: Dumb question #143 -- How do I get the *scratch* window back ??

[Thien-Thi Nguyen]

() William Case <billlinux@rogers.com>
() Wed, 02 May 2007 00:05:55 -0400

   There must be a simple command but I can't find it.

i use M-x give-me-a-scratch-buffer-now RET.

thi

Re: Dumb question #143 -- How do I get the *scratch* window back ??

[William Case]

On Wed, 2007-05-02 at 09:47 +0200, Thien-Thi Nguyen wrote:
> () William Case <billlinux@rogers.com>
> () Wed, 02 May 2007 00:05:55 -0400
> 
>    There must be a simple command but I can't find it.
> 
> i use M-x give-me-a-scratch-buffer-now RET.

Thanks Thi.  I tried it.  It said "No.  You have done a bad thing."

> thi
> _______________________________________________
> help-gnu-emacs mailing list
> help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org
> http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/help-gnu-emacs
-- 
Regards Bill

Re: Dumb question #143 -- How do I get the *scratch* window back ??

[Thien-Thi Nguyen]

() William Case <billlinux@rogers.com>
() Wed, 02 May 2007 10:08:33 -0400

   It said "No.  You have done a bad thing."

it must still be in uncouth-scoundrel (minor) mode.

thi

Re: Dumb question #143 -- How do I get the *scratch* window back ??

[weber]

On May 2, 4:47 pm, Thien-Thi Nguyen <t...@gnuvola.org> wrote:
> () William Case <billli...@rogers.com>
> () Wed, 02 May 2007 10:08:33 -0400
>
>    It said "No.  You have done a bad thing."
>
> it must still be in uncouth-scoundrel (minor) mode.
>
> thi

What is the sense of having an immortal _scratch_? :)
-weber

Re: Dumb question #143 -- How do I get the *scratch* window back ??

[Mark Elston]

* weber wrote (on 5/2/2007 4:14 PM):
> On May 2, 4:47 pm, Thien-Thi Nguyen <t...@gnuvola.org> wrote:
>> () William Case <billli...@rogers.com>
>> () Wed, 02 May 2007 10:08:33 -0400
>>
>>    It said "No.  You have done a bad thing."
>>
>> it must still be in uncouth-scoundrel (minor) mode.
>>
>> thi
> 
> What is the sense of having an immortal _scratch_? :)
> -weber
> 
> 

It sure comes in handy when you have an immortal *itch* :)

Mark

Re: Dumb question #143 -- How do I get the *scratch* window back ??

[William Case]

Thank you Mark;

Your post arrived at exactly the right moment.  When I read it I threw
back my head and laughed and laughed.

On Wed, 2007-05-02 at 17:18 -0700, Mark Elston wrote:
> * weber wrote (on 5/2/2007 4:14 PM):
> > On May 2, 4:47 pm, Thien-Thi Nguyen <t...@gnuvola.org> wrote:
> >> () William Case <billli...@rogers.com>
> >> () Wed, 02 May 2007 10:08:33 -0400
> >>
> >>    It said "No.  You have done a bad thing."
> >>
> >> it must still be in uncouth-scoundrel (minor) mode.
> >>
> >> thi
> > 
> > What is the sense of having an immortal _scratch_? :)
> > -weber
> > 
> > 
> 
> It sure comes in handy when you have an immortal *itch* :)

This post has turned into pure adult silliness, bad puns and the best
kind of fun.

-- 
Regards Bill

Re: Dumb question #143 -- How do I get the *scratch* window back ??

[weber]

On May 3, 2:55 pm, William Case <billli...@rogers.com> wrote:
> Thank you Mark;
>
> Your post arrived at exactly the right moment.  When I read it I threw
> back my head and laughed and laughed.
>
>
>
> On Wed, 2007-05-02 at 17:18 -0700, Mark Elston wrote:
> > * weber wrote (on 5/2/2007 4:14 PM):
> > > On May 2, 4:47 pm, Thien-Thi Nguyen <t...@gnuvola.org> wrote:
> > >> () William Case <billli...@rogers.com>
> > >> () Wed, 02 May 2007 10:08:33 -0400
>
> > >>    It said "No.  You have done a bad thing."
>
> > >> it must still be in uncouth-scoundrel (minor) mode.
>
> > >> thi
>
> > > What is the sense of having an immortal _scratch_? :)
> > > -weber
>
> > It sure comes in hady when you have an immortal *itch* :)
>
> This post has turned into pure adult silliness, bad puns and the best
> kind of fun.
>
> --
> Regards Bill

That was funny :) (though only the first time)

Re: Dumb question #143 -- How do I get the *scratch* window back ??

[William Case]

On Thu, 2007-05-03 at 20:31 -0700, weber wrote:
> On May 3, 2:55 pm, William Case <billli...@rogers.com> wrote:
> > Thank you Mark;
> >
> > Your post arrived at exactly the right moment.  When I read it I threw
> > back my head and laughed and laughed.
> >
> >
> >
> > On Wed, 2007-05-02 at 17:18 -0700, Mark Elston wrote:
> > > * weber wrote (on 5/2/2007 4:14 PM):
> > > > On May 2, 4:47 pm, Thien-Thi Nguyen <t...@gnuvola.org> wrote:
> > > >> () William Case <billli...@rogers.com>
> > > >> () Wed, 02 May 2007 10:08:33 -0400
> >
> > > >>    It said "No.  You have done a bad thing."
> >
> > > >> it must still be in uncouth-scoundrel (minor) mode.
> >
> > > >> thi
> >
> > > > What is the sense of having an immortal _scratch_? :)
> > > > -weber
> >
> > > It sure comes in hady when you have an immortal *itch* :)
> >
> > This post has turned into pure adult silliness, bad puns and the best
> > kind of fun.
> >
> > --
> > Regards Bill
> 
> That was funny :) (though only the first time)

I suppose.  But it was the first time I had heard it.  Now that I think
about it, there probably has been dumb *scratch* jokes been going around
since emacs was invented.

-- 
Regards Bill

Re: Dumb question #143 -- How do I get the *scratch* window back ??

[Mark Elston]

* William Case wrote (on 5/3/2007 9:16 PM):
> On Thu, 2007-05-03 at 20:31 -0700, weber wrote:
>> On May 3, 2:55 pm, William Case <billli...@rogers.com> wrote:
>>> Thank you Mark;
>>>
>>> Your post arrived at exactly the right moment.  When I read it I threw
>>> back my head and laughed and laughed.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, 2007-05-02 at 17:18 -0700, Mark Elston wrote:
>>>> * weber wrote (on 5/2/2007 4:14 PM):
>>>>> On May 2, 4:47 pm, Thien-Thi Nguyen <t...@gnuvola.org> wrote:
>>>>>> () William Case <billli...@rogers.com>
>>>>>> () Wed, 02 May 2007 10:08:33 -0400
>>>>>>    It said "No.  You have done a bad thing."
>>>>>> it must still be in uncouth-scoundrel (minor) mode.
>>>>>> thi
>>>>> What is the sense of having an immortal _scratch_? :)
>>>>> -weber
>>>> It sure comes in hady when you have an immortal *itch* :)
>>> This post has turned into pure adult silliness, bad puns and the best
>>> kind of fun.
>>>
>>> --
>>> Regards Bill
>> That was funny :) (though only the first time)
> 
> I suppose.  But it was the first time I had heard it.  Now that I think
> about it, there probably has been dumb *scratch* jokes been going around
> since emacs was invented.
> 

Now that you mention it it is a fertile topic for puns.  I hadn't read
any before, though.  I guess I don't spend enough time on the Emacs
groups .... (though my wife and boss - not the same person - probably
disagree)

Mark

Re: Dumb question #143 -- How do I get the *scratch* window back ??

[William Case]

Hi Weber;

On Wed, 2007-05-02 at 16:14 -0700, weber wrote:
> On May 2, 4:47 pm, Thien-Thi Nguyen <t...@gnuvola.org> wrote:
> > () William Case <billli...@rogers.com>
> > () Wed, 02 May 2007 10:08:33 -0400
> >
> >    It said "No.  You have done a bad thing."
> >
> > it must still be in uncouth-scoundrel (minor) mode.
> >
> > thi
> 
> What is the sense of having an immortal _scratch_? :)

Nothing wrong with an immortal scratch.  It's the immortal itch you have
to watch out for.

-- 
Regards Bill

Dumb question #143 -- How do I get the *scratch* window back ??

[William Case]

Hi;

I have been inadvertently deleting my "scratch* window.  How do I get it
back?

I know I can M-x Lisp-interaction-mode, but it's not the same.  I would
like to get *scratch* back.  There must be a simple command but I can't
find it.

-- 
Regards Bill

Re: Dumb question #143 -- How do I get the *scratch* window back ??

[Eric Hanchrow]

>>>>> "William" == William Case <billlinux@rogers.com> writes:

    William> Hi; I have been inadvertently deleting my "scratch*
    William> window.  How do I get it back?

It's so simple, it's annoying!

C-x b *scratch* RET M-x lisp-interaction-mode RET

-- 
[T]he best strip of the last decade is "Dilbert", and it
sure isn't because of the drawing.
        -- Garry Trudeau

Re: Dumb question #143 -- How do I get the *scratch* window back ??

[Stephen Berman]

On Tue, 01 May 2007 21:11:54 -0700 Eric Hanchrow <offby1@blarg.net> wrote:

>>>>>> "William" == William Case <billlinux@rogers.com> writes:
>
>     William> Hi; I have been inadvertently deleting my "scratch*
>     William> window.  How do I get it back?
>
> It's so simple, it's annoying!
>
> C-x b *scratch* RET M-x lisp-interaction-mode RET

In Emacs 22 it suffices to do C-x b *scratch* RET; the major mode is
automagically lisp-interaction-mode.

Steve Berman

Re: Dumb question #143 -- How do I get the *scratch* window back ??

[William Case]

On Wed, 2007-05-02 at 15:21 +0200, Stephen Berman wrote:
> On Tue, 01 May 2007 21:11:54 -0700 Eric Hanchrow <offby1@blarg.net> wrote:
> 
[snip]
> > It's so simple, it's annoying!
> >
> > C-x b *scratch* RET M-x lisp-interaction-mode RET
> 
> In Emacs 22 it suffices to do C-x b *scratch* RET; the major mode is
> automagically lisp-interaction-mode.
> 
Works in Emacs 21.4 too.  It's do simple, who would have thunk it!
> Steve Berman

-- 
Regards Bill

Re: Dumb question #143 -- How do I get the *scratch* window back ??

[Amy Templeton]

William Case wrote:
> I have been inadvertently deleting my "scratch* window.
> How do I get it back?

You can add the following code to your .emacs file (taken
from either the emacs wiki or from some useful person's
website...apologies to whomever is going uncredited here).
The effect of this is to grant you an immortal scratch
buffer. Once killed, it rise from the ashes, albeit empty.
Enjoy!

Code:
_________________________________________________________________

;;; Immortal scratch buffer
(save-excursion
  (set-buffer (get-buffer-create "*scratch*"))
  (lisp-interaction-mode)
  (make-local-variable 'kill-buffer-query-functions)
  (add-hook 'kill-buffer-query-functions 'kill-scratch-buffer))

(defun kill-scratch-buffer ()
  ;; Kill the current (*scratch*) buffer
  (remove-hook 'kill-buffer-query-functions 'kill-scratch-buffer)
  (kill-buffer (current-buffer))
  ;; Make a brand new *scratch* buffer
  (set-buffer (get-buffer-create "*scratch*"))
  (lisp-interaction-mode)
  (make-local-variable 'kill-buffer-query-functions)
  (add-hook 'kill-buffer-query-functions 'kill-scratch-buffer)
  ;; Since we killed it, don't let caller do that.
  nil)
_________________________________________________________________

Amy

P.S.:  You do need to include both the defun and the first
       stanza; the part before the defun adds a hook to your
       current scratch buffer's kill-buffer-query-functions
       which will call the program defined in the defun if
       the buffer is killed, which creates a new scratch
       buffer and adds a hook to your new scratch buffer's
       kill-buffer-query-functions which will call the
       program defined in the defun, which...