From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Richard Stallman Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: next-error-find-buffer (was: kill-compilation failing when there are several compilation buffers) Date: Thu, 02 Aug 2007 23:38:18 -0400 Message-ID: References: <87r6mndorr.fsf@jurta.org> Reply-To: rms@gnu.org NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15 X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1186112189 9440 80.91.229.12 (3 Aug 2007 03:36:29 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 3 Aug 2007 03:36:29 +0000 (UTC) Cc: juri@jurta.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Stefan Monnier Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Aug 03 05:36:27 2007 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1IGnxj-0007IG-0S for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 03 Aug 2007 05:36:27 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IGnxi-0003J6-Fc for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 02 Aug 2007 23:36:26 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1IGnxB-0002xO-83 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 02 Aug 2007 23:35:53 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1IGnx9-0002wk-RR for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 02 Aug 2007 23:35:52 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IGnx9-0002wd-DO for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 02 Aug 2007 23:35:51 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([140.186.70.10]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1IGnx9-0008PS-2W for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 02 Aug 2007 23:35:51 -0400 Original-Received: from rms by fencepost.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1IGnzW-0001sE-4X; Thu, 02 Aug 2007 23:38:18 -0400 In-reply-to: (message from Stefan Monnier on Thu, 02 Aug 2007 12:17:44 -0400) X-Detected-Kernel: Linux 2.6, seldom 2.4 (older, 4) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:75980 Archived-At: Actually, that thread did not conclude that the current set of rules is The Right Way. It ignored my suggestion (which was to keep the `current-buffer' as the first rule, but to disable it if current-buffer was the last source buffer visited by next-error). I can see how, in some situations, that would be better behavior in next-error. (My change is still needed for kill-compilation.) However, it seems to me that there may be other situations were it might be worse behavior. This is the sort of issue where no solution is clearly right, every choice is a heuristic, and there may not be any best solution. Since your change makes the code more complex, I think we should not install it now. Instead, people should try it, and we can see whether they generally like it better. If they do, then please install it.