bug#63956: 29.0.91; tex-mode display problem in emacs-29

[Jeff Norden <norden.jeff@gmail.com>]

On Mon, Jun 12, 2023 at 6:48 AM Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> OK, thanks.  But did you see any difference between doing this the way
> Emacs 28 did (without 2nd argument to pop-to-buffer) and the way the
> code now does on the emacs-29 branch?  IOW, does this scenario produce
> reasonable results after my recent changes?

The default behavior in emacs-29 is now the same as it was in 28.2, so I
don't see any need to make further changes at this point.
---
If my (admittedly limited) understanding of display buffer actions is
correct, then calling display-buffer or pop-to-buffer with a
'reuse-window' action would only differ from a call without any action
if either:
  (a) display-buffer-base-action has been customized, or
  (b) the buffer name has been listed in same-window-buffer-names or
      matches same-window-regexps
This assumes that display-buffer-fallback-action has its default
value, which it should since it is defined with defconst in window.el:

 (defconst display-buffer-fallback-action
  '((display-buffer--maybe-same-window  ;FIXME: why isn't this redundant?
     display-buffer-reuse-window
     display-buffer--maybe-pop-up-frame-or-window
     display-buffer-in-previous-window
     display-buffer-use-some-window
     ;; If all else fails, pop up a new frame.
     display-buffer-pop-up-frame))

Perhaps this answers the question in the above code, --maybe-same-window
seems to be for backwards compatibility to allow the use of the
same-window- variables, which pre-date window actions.
Using display-buffer-alist is the recommended way to do things now, and
gets first priority.

Thanks,
-Jeff