Why was diary-fancy-display-mode conditionalized?

Why was diary-fancy-display-mode conditionalized?

[Stephen Berman]

As a result of this change:

2009-09-04  Glenn Morris  <rgm@gnu.org>
        [...]
	* calendar/diary-lib.el (diary-fancy-display): Only switch modes if
	necessary.

diary-fancy-display-mode-hook is only run when there is no live buffer
whose major mode is diary-fancy-display-mode; i.e., in effect, when
there is no fancy diary buffer.  Previously the hook was run
unconditionally.  Since calling diary-fancy-display when there is a live
fancy diary buffer erases and rewrites the buffer, but does not change
its major mode, this change means that, in this circumstance, any
functions in diary-fancy-display-mode-hook will not be called, which
can, e.g., result in a surprising change in the appearance of the fancy
diary buffer (I have such a function in diary-fancy-display-mode-hook in
my init file and was a victim of such surprise).  This seems like a bug
to me, and I think the simplest fix is to revert the change; or does it
fix some other problem?  If so, then how can the failure to run
diary-fancy-display-mode-hook be repaired?

Steve Berman

Re: Why was diary-fancy-display-mode conditionalized?

[Glenn Morris]

Stephen Berman wrote:

>  This seems like a bug to me, and I think the simplest fix is to
> revert the change; or does it fix some other problem?

I can't really remember. I think it was possibly to do with preventing
a loop in some case. Anyway, I simply made sure it always runs the hook.

Re: Why was diary-fancy-display-mode conditionalized?

[Stephen Berman]

On Wed, 23 Sep 2009 23:28:28 -0400 Glenn Morris <rgm@gnu.org> wrote:

> Stephen Berman wrote:
>
>>  This seems like a bug to me, and I think the simplest fix is to
>> revert the change; or does it fix some other problem?
>
> I can't really remember. I think it was possibly to do with preventing
> a loop in some case. Anyway, I simply made sure it always runs the hook.

Thanks,

Steve Berman