bug#9532: 24.0.50; `special-display-regexps' is no longer respected

["Drew Adams" <drew.adams@oracle.com>]

> >> OTOH, I don't see an easy way to handle all the backward
> >> compatibility ... in this case.
> >
> > FWIW, Martin's code worked fine in this regard.
> > ...
> > Perhaps look to Martin's code for an answer?  Even if you decide not
> > to do everything the same way he did it, perhaps for things 
> > like this his code can help guide you.  Dunno.
> 
> I don't know why you seem to think that there is some great mystery
> here.

What gives you that impression?  What mystery did I speak about?  What makes you
think that I "seem to think" there is a mystery, great or small?

I am ignorant of the various implementations - that's the only "mystery" I'm
aware of: ignorance.  I have been speaking only about what a user sees.

If my suggestion to maybe look at how Martin kept backward compatibility is not
helpful then please ignore it.  All I know is the behavior I see: his code was,
AFAICT, backward compatible.  The current code has at least this bug, so far.

> The issue is quite clear: how to handle the transition 
> away from same-window-regexps in commands like `info'.
> The current code, AFAICT, also "works fine" if you change info back to
> using pop-to-buffer + same-window-regexps.

Great, then there is presumably no problem.  Make it work fine.  DTRT.