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: Wed, 10 Aug 2011 12:42:19 +0200 Message-ID: <87zkjha6pg.fsf@gmail.com> References: <87mxgem09k.fsf@stupidchicken.com> <8739hvu6lh.fsf@stupidchicken.com> <4E2C50E6.3020103@gmx.at> <878vrnweju.fsf@stupidchicken.com> <4E2D34D7.4040002@gmx.at> <87r55cjvef.fsf@stupidchicken.com> <87sjpsnerd.fsf@mail.jurta.org> <4E355D2C.40709@gmx.at> <87k4axzg7j.fsf@mail.jurta.org> <87oc092gy0.fsf@stupidchicken.com> <4E380897.5000406@gmx.at> <871ux2nsrw.fsf@stupidchicken.com> <4E3AA5DA.8030403@gmx.at> <87mxfnn414.fsf@stupidchicken.com> <4E3D41F2.8060801@gmx.at> <4E3FA812.3080009@gmx.at> <4E412E0B.1000002@gmx.at> <4E422EB8.1020309@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 1312973242 1070 80.91.229.12 (10 Aug 2011 10:47:22 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 10 Aug 2011 10:47:22 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Juri Linkov , Chong Yidong , Stefan Monnier , emacs-devel@gnu.org To: martin rudalics Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Aug 10 12:47:17 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 1Qr6Jh-0005vH-9E for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 10 Aug 2011 12:47:17 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:41226 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Qr6Jg-0003rJ-QB for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 10 Aug 2011 06:47:16 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]:40675) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Qr6Jb-0003rC-4m for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 10 Aug 2011 06:47:15 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Qr6JX-0000tM-0x for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 10 Aug 2011 06:47:11 -0400 Original-Received: from mail-fx0-f41.google.com ([209.85.161.41]:51663) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Qr6JW-0000tG-S0 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 10 Aug 2011 06:47:06 -0400 Original-Received: by fxg9 with SMTP id 9so962029fxg.0 for ; Wed, 10 Aug 2011 03:47:05 -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=oPnwHjaXT1vppvuid92ZwmqVn9SWOFYie8Ui5iYhzMQ=; b=ICvRduadzeE15mIEr7sZS2rcw68gjYJwfMZB9YISr5xiBfso8WdvpdWLFCP5ktfiPv ndRHLQ1ppWxEn2hC98aG1O1O9W3NErNMa8MBYahvEWVc2miYuLTiaeSskwIMIC+OQYv+ mfn18d7czZyoCLMrxGYW14idVnIQn3Kuyc3ZA= Original-Received: by 10.223.145.7 with SMTP id b7mr10974807fav.56.1312973225734; Wed, 10 Aug 2011 03:47:05 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: from localhost (176.119.broadband10.iol.cz [90.177.119.176]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id x2sm652424fal.20.2011.08.10.03.47.02 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Wed, 10 Aug 2011 03:47:03 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <4E422EB8.1020309@gmx.at> (martin rudalics's message of "Wed, 10 Aug 2011 09:09:44 +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: 209.85.161.41 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:143099 Archived-At: On Wed, 10 Aug 2011 09:09:44 +0200 martin rudalics wrote: >>> I'm lost here. Do you mean that users who prefer the old >>> `display-buffer' behavior get overridden by the application whenever >>> it passes an argument but do get the old behavior when the application >>> does not pass an argument? >> >> Yes. > > Ouch. Bah! Please don't let this happen. Other than being inconsistent/confusing/crazy (I'm not quite sure what the "old behavior" means here), wasn't the main point of the rewrite to give power to the user? IOW, users must _always_ be able to override what the application specified. --=20 =C5=A0t=C4=9Bp=C3=A1n