Re: switch-to-buffer: for interactive use only

[martin rudalics <rudalics@gmx.at>]

 >> No.  `pop-to-buffer-same-window' doesn't use the selected window if it's
 >> weakly dedicated.  Think of making a window dedicated as a poor man's
 >> way of saying "leave this window alone unless I explicitly want to show
 >> another buffer in it".
 >
 > That's a mistake: if the window is fully dedicated, that's right, but if
 > it's weakly dedicated, pop-to-buffer-same-window should override the
 > weak dedication, like switch-to-buffer does (otherwise, there would
 > never be any difference between the two forms of dedication).

Do you want to change this in the sense that both `switch-to-buffer' and
`pop-to-buffer-same-window' should reuse a weakly dedicated window?  In
that case I'd obviously agree with Chong that there's no real difference
between the two.

So we should make `switch-to-buffer' do what it has always done (just
that now it's more fully customizable).  I'm not sure though whether you
would want to make `display-buffer' reuse weakly dedicated windows too?
What would weak dedication be good for then?

martin