From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: =?utf-8?B?xaB0xJtww6FuIE7Em21lYw==?= Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: display-buffer-alist simplifications Date: Mon, 25 Jul 2011 11:29:45 +0200 Message-ID: <87ipqq4sja.fsf@gmail.com> References: <87mxgem09k.fsf@stupidchicken.com> <4E2A7EBD.7050300@gmx.at> <87livooqt6.fsf@stupidchicken.com> <4E2B158B.1080101@gmx.at> <87wrf8iyse.fsf@stupidchicken.com> <4E2BEED2.5040608@gmx.at> <8739hvu6lh.fsf@stupidchicken.com> <4E2C50E6.3020103@gmx.at> <878vrnweju.fsf@stupidchicken.com> <4E2D34D7.4040002@gmx.at> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1311586474 31639 80.91.229.12 (25 Jul 2011 09:34:34 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 25 Jul 2011 09:34:34 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Chong Yidong , emacs-devel@gnu.org To: martin rudalics Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Jul 25 11:34:30 2011 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([140.186.70.17]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1QlHYR-0005Nx-Q1 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 25 Jul 2011 11:34:27 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:36427 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QlHYR-0002Qv-CM for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 25 Jul 2011 05:34:27 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]:40133) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QlHYO-0002Qb-SU for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 25 Jul 2011 05:34:25 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QlHYJ-0001kI-85 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 25 Jul 2011 05:34:24 -0400 Original-Received: from mail-fx0-f52.google.com ([209.85.161.52]:53664) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QlHYJ-0001kD-3O for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 25 Jul 2011 05:34:19 -0400 Original-Received: by fxd18 with SMTP id 18so7160465fxd.39 for ; Mon, 25 Jul 2011 02:34:18 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:references:user-agent:date :message-id:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=UuSqqRmpqtpRIYJ6YjzORwwwEdQFAWDUatUxgfuIaWc=; b=GAsHTbefTlRx7xxfxVXkY2fxURAOphLTFej0D+siszUQ1YmfwvDMUUg/MI5gPA3982 Y/RtxuAyX2gRehtS5EnsgrwLcLX2RPjpI+tqJclGOL7M+0KqKgUneu3t/KsnZIRtjryw hNU+iIqCt2TFjqzNugwWAk4Ladea9VF/2K1IU= Original-Received: by 10.223.87.79 with SMTP id v15mr2156782fal.125.1311586458188; Mon, 25 Jul 2011 02:34:18 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: from localhost (176.119.broadband10.iol.cz [90.177.119.176]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id h10sm3685672fai.43.2011.07.25.02.34.16 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Mon, 25 Jul 2011 02:34:16 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <4E2D34D7.4040002@gmx.at> (martin rudalics's message of "Mon, 25 Jul 2011 11:18:15 +0200") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.0.50 (gnu/linux) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 2) X-Received-From: 209.85.161.52 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:142276 Archived-At: On Monday, 25.07.2011, martin rudalics wrote:=20 > martin, who begins feeling to weak to delve into this subject again. Not that it probably matters at all, but let me express my sincere appreciation for all your work on making `display-buffer' and friends suck less. I do hope the outcome of this discussion won't be sticking with the Emacs 23 state of things. I think the objections raised by other developers might largely stem from their insufficient understanding of the new semantics, which in itself might largely stem from its documentation not being good enough? I tend to agree with Drew here -- let's first try to improve the docs so we all understand Martin's proposed changes well enough, before rejecting them or trying to improve upon them. So I'd think at this point questions of the form "How do I get this specific behaviour I want with your new system?" are more useful than "Why not redesign it like this?" or "Why not drop these parts of the new design?". --=20 =C5=A0t=C4=9Bp=C3=A1n