From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: =?UTF-8?Q?Jo=C3=A3o_?= =?UTF-8?Q?T=C3=A1vora?= Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#33870: 27.0.50; xref-goto-xref not configurable Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2019 11:17:21 +0000 Message-ID: References: <87a7ktqqx7.fsf@mail.linkov.net> <9215183d-0a44-88b5-5b3c-d0da31f749ad@yandex.ru> <878t02egph.fsf@mail.linkov.net> <874lak9kr0.fsf@mail.linkov.net> <87zhscklhq.fsf@gmail.com> <5C346C76.4050803@gmx.at> NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1546946168 5209 195.159.176.226 (8 Jan 2019 11:16:08 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2019 11:16:08 +0000 (UTC) Cc: 33870@debbugs.gnu.org, Juri Linkov , Stefan Monnier , Dmitry Gutov To: martin rudalics Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Jan 08 12:16:04 2019 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1ggpMa-0001Er-2y for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Tue, 08 Jan 2019 12:16:04 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:44583 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ggpOg-00058b-SP for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Tue, 08 Jan 2019 06:18:14 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:56316) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ggpOX-00058I-45 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 08 Jan 2019 06:18:06 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ggpOV-0003kw-CH for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 08 Jan 2019 06:18:05 -0500 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]:50008) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ggpOV-0003jU-8t for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 08 Jan 2019 06:18:03 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1ggpOU-0004rT-Gm for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 08 Jan 2019 06:18:02 -0500 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: =?UTF-8?Q?Jo=C3=A3o_?= =?UTF-8?Q?T=C3=A1vora?= Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Tue, 08 Jan 2019 11:18:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 33870 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: Original-Received: via spool by 33870-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B33870.154694626118658 (code B ref 33870); Tue, 08 Jan 2019 11:18:02 +0000 Original-Received: (at 33870) by debbugs.gnu.org; 8 Jan 2019 11:17:41 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:49289 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1ggpO9-0004qr-6x for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 08 Jan 2019 06:17:41 -0500 Original-Received: from mail-qk1-f181.google.com ([209.85.222.181]:37931) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1ggpO7-0004qd-95 for 33870@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 08 Jan 2019 06:17:39 -0500 Original-Received: by mail-qk1-f181.google.com with SMTP id a1so2060540qkc.5 for <33870@debbugs.gnu.org>; Tue, 08 Jan 2019 03:17:39 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=Tji5fT5Puf43bGA/0GUuIA4y6XjDqnskhBu1viQZJKc=; b=lyzplIFqFSHYDyAfOflNy66xSTv8qv3Dznuy0Q+Sm08Rk3vyQahWFO/6u5szPIYdbR Y5IHqHs6TM7GdxoBr52vNhvZWtH4c0rcbdRbZ9ukkMlxbOmWgomWy1Pu4KwYXZt8xDDK dqG721I9lxeEhXG21z44z+OQeeWv1f0TS/NojM3zGzuYGvao7/qrY6EEfzWJldKbEw9K iSxRrH+RGUqcgOQEj9O4ztuyrJIDZZjPhTv0cbpYbgEmT1LhDkNKPp0LWb2xfG7DDWSw rfzMq8y8QGgHahb75LPiohIQiYD7IEJJ90gAU1EFR277FQF0Xsmfk1wgOKLXxkcBmtWd qbRA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=Tji5fT5Puf43bGA/0GUuIA4y6XjDqnskhBu1viQZJKc=; b=fSjxtKMVSxwm1uDWCbwxojKFAfDIH3I8MYxg7vrCv7bI7C6tNoofyUa6GV7TlzoUgi +zx4LQj7a+K0f8d3+NbI7IZ/pQzxHxb5SLEQNjKajxI2KLPJJh0yQefPYLbsByWDFMP5 uhuSHHQJ/jnT2kfLxWAfU/q4XdcI8Sg1EEvMQ4XhNwz0bMBH+LUz0z3X8wky0AJ64DAd Ooutn4stkk6ovQDv/7gjLpxcZ2tLp1fiCvgpCUXwtLGLDI+N0VpbVS6AnVM6hZOoDNJv bR6ROipv1sVgF+ExZEV1yucsn2nARGuOf68Y4czeMKPig4q9lH1je7wd/1thGGhmOuVG 5w+g== X-Gm-Message-State: AJcUukdyVJThtY3vhTKNcy1TfWTn9VrBxyXdsPT1xAfW60mzTNsNPIxi yGt4laFrS12BSAN7vrwpnjN+2pPdIoWo6BmW3+c= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ALg8bN7uyHtVpm6x42FBro8ZCTgcaa66zzLG4wVwngKLIqb3xiyN6ahd6WlbFI8LC2ZV3+KMiz6nS5bha1CrqBisziU= X-Received: by 2002:ae9:d804:: with SMTP id u4mr1137490qkf.322.1546946253653; Tue, 08 Jan 2019 03:17:33 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <5C346C76.4050803@gmx.at> X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 209.51.188.43 X-BeenThere: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org List-Id: "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "bug-gnu-emacs" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.bugs:154252 Archived-At: On Tue, Jan 8, 2019 at 9:25 AM martin rudalics wrote: > So before making this function public, we should resolve this calling > convention. Makes sense. Then, in my view, the logical sequence to fix this bug is A. First do these changes to window.el and publish a decent window-display-buffer calling convention. B. Push a xref.el based on the new function that doesn't change the xref UI. C. Discuss the xref.el UI in the other bug. > Personally, I'd proceed as follows: > > (1) Deprecate the variable 'display-buffer-mark-dedicated'. > > (2) Remove the DEDICATED argument from this function. > > (3) Add a 'dedicated' action alist entry to implement the > functionality. When do you think you can do this? Be advised there is indeed some third-party code already relying on the internal "--" version of this funct= ion. We might be breaking some of that code (otoh it was "asking for it" for using such an implementation detail). > And we should [...] and another thing Do both of these more ambitious refactorings really need to make it in before we can do B as outlined above? Or can we do them later in parallel? Jo=C3=A3o