From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#42386: Acknowledgement ([PATCH] Handle symbols in project-kill-buffers-ignores) Date: Tue, 21 Jul 2020 21:57:26 +0300 Message-ID: <83y2ncg0h5.fsf@gnu.org> References: <878sfcaf78.fsf@warpmail.net> Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="25432"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: 42386@debbugs.gnu.org, dgutov@yandex.ru To: "Philip K." Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Tue Jul 21 20:58:17 2020 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1jxxSz-0006W2-Ct for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Tue, 21 Jul 2020 20:58:17 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:40384 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jxxSy-0007FK-F9 for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Tue, 21 Jul 2020 14:58:16 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:49870) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jxxSk-00074L-CM for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 21 Jul 2020 14:58:02 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]:57121) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jxxSk-0003Cu-2r for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 21 Jul 2020 14:58:02 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1jxxSk-0006SO-34 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 21 Jul 2020 14:58:02 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Eli Zaretskii Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Tue, 21 Jul 2020 18:58:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 42386 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: patch Original-Received: via spool by 42386-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B42386.159535787624801 (code B ref 42386); Tue, 21 Jul 2020 18:58:02 +0000 Original-Received: (at 42386) by debbugs.gnu.org; 21 Jul 2020 18:57:56 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:40433 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1jxxSe-0006Rx-35 for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 21 Jul 2020 14:57:56 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:56336) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1jxxSc-0006Rk-8z for 42386@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 21 Jul 2020 14:57:54 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]:34426) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jxxSS-0003BT-KU; Tue, 21 Jul 2020 14:57:45 -0400 Original-Received: from [176.228.60.248] (port=3682 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1jxxSD-0001nE-5I; Tue, 21 Jul 2020 14:57:42 -0400 In-Reply-To: <878sfcaf78.fsf@warpmail.net> (philip@warpmail.net) X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list X-BeenThere: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org List-Id: "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "bug-gnu-emacs" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.bugs:183363 Archived-At: > From: "Philip K." > Cc: dgutov@yandex.ru, 42386@debbugs.gnu.org > Date: Tue, 21 Jul 2020 20:35:55 +0200 > > > Is this function intended to never be invoked from Lisp? If it can be > > invoked from Lisp, then asking the yes-or-no-p question might not be > > appropriate in the non-interactive case > > So would you suggest factoring out that programmatic part or checking if > the command was invoked interactively? Something like that. Assuming that Dmitry agrees. > > (and the "No buffers to kill" message might be spared as well). > > I added "No buffers to kill", because if you're in a buffer that isn't > killed, calling project-kill-buffers seems to have no effect. The message is okay for interactive invocation, IMO, but maybe we shouldn't show it for non-interactive case?