From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: David Kastrup Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Scratch buffer annoyance Date: Mon, 06 Aug 2007 16:35:12 +0200 Message-ID: <86fy2wbujj.fsf@lola.quinscape.zz> References: <85ejinrqgk.fsf@lola.goethe.zz> <35917.128.165.123.18.1185998078.squirrel@webmail.lanl.gov> <85vebzq7vd.fsf@lola.goethe.zz> <87odhqethv.fsf@catnip.gol.com> <87zm18v7ug.fsf@jurta.org> <85abt7kck1.fsf@lola.goethe.zz> <87hcndc3zc.fsf@jurta.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1186410938 12753 80.91.229.12 (6 Aug 2007 14:35:38 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 6 Aug 2007 14:35:38 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Juri Linkov , emacs-devel@gnu.org To: rms@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Aug 06 16:35:37 2007 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1II3gE-0008Cf-4A for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 06 Aug 2007 16:35:37 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1II3gA-0005DK-O6 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 06 Aug 2007 10:35:30 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1II3g7-0005D8-KP for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 06 Aug 2007 10:35:27 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1II3g3-0005C3-5j for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 06 Aug 2007 10:35:27 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1II3g3-0005C0-4A for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 06 Aug 2007 10:35:23 -0400 Original-Received: from pc3.berlin.powerweb.de ([62.67.228.11]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1II3g1-0008Kp-3B for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 06 Aug 2007 10:35:22 -0400 Original-Received: from quinscape.de (dslnet.212-29-44.ip210.dokom.de [212.29.44.210] (may be forged)) by pc3.berlin.powerweb.de (8.9.3p3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id QAA08142 for ; Mon, 6 Aug 2007 16:35:05 +0200 X-Delivered-To: Original-Received: (qmail 12905 invoked from network); 6 Aug 2007 14:35:12 -0000 Original-Received: from unknown (HELO lola.quinscape.zz) ([10.0.3.43]) (envelope-sender ) by ns.quinscape.de (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP for ; 6 Aug 2007 14:35:12 -0000 Original-Received: by lola.quinscape.zz (Postfix, from userid 1001) id 38A378FA2F; Mon, 6 Aug 2007 16:35:12 +0200 (CEST) In-Reply-To: (Richard Stallman's message of "Mon\, 06 Aug 2007 10\:19\:58 -0400") User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.1.50 (gnu/linux) X-Detected-Kernel: Linux 2.4-2.6 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:76091 Archived-At: Richard Stallman writes: > > As I understand it, part of the idea of this change is that > > there won't BE a *scratch* buffer if you don't request it > > in `initial-buffer-contents'. > > It is very useful to create a *scratch* buffer at startup, even if it is > not displayed immediately. > > Why do you find it particularly useful? I want to try to gauge > how many users would find it desirable. Would they be so many > that it would be unacceptable to recommend they use this recipe > to set it up? > > (with-current-buffer (get-buffer-create "*scratch*") > (lisp-interaction-mode)) Personally, my workflow happens to make me delete the scratch buffer occasionally, and revisit it later. So I want to be able to have it, when it gets recreated, to be in lisp-interaction-mode. In fact, people thought this so desirable that we have * Changes in Emacs 21.2 [...] ** When the *scratch* buffer is recreated, its mode is set from initial-major-mode, which normally is lisp-interaction-mode, instead of using default-major-mode. I would like to retain the ability to do this, though I agree that "initial-major-mode" is a completely misleading name for it under the new startup design and should become a deprecated alias (do we have that?) for something more fitting. -- David Kastrup