From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: martin rudalics Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#45072: 28.0.50; Emacs switches other buffer back uncontrollably, if other window's buffer is changed by user during minibuffer editing Date: Mon, 19 Apr 2021 18:02:19 +0200 Message-ID: References: <86eek3hvu5.fsf@protected.rcdrun.com> <87eek1fvgf.fsf@gnus.org> <83eek18ref.fsf@gnu.org> <835z5d8lhc.fsf@gnu.org> <87pn3k87tx.fsf@mail.linkov.net> <877dpqzx3o.fsf@mail.linkov.net> <57c673d0-e6e7-120d-8893-92b02ab1530e@gmx.at> <87wnxqxdx5.fsf@mail.linkov.net> <73e2a032-d3e9-bc94-2f72-246096ce03cb@gmx.at> <87pn3e697i.fsf@mail.linkov.net> <35666a8a-6888-972c-4e20-bf05cf09d764@gmx.at> <87tuso16qn.fsf@mail.linkov.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="10491"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: larsi@gnus.org, Jean Louis , 45072@debbugs.gnu.org To: Stefan Monnier , Juri Linkov Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Mon Apr 19 18:08:37 2021 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1lYWRx-0002cB-2Q for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Mon, 19 Apr 2021 18:08:37 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:37890 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lYWRv-0005V8-Sl for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Mon, 19 Apr 2021 12:08:35 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:34196) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lYWNX-0000Le-A5 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 19 Apr 2021 12:04:03 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]:40287) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lYWNV-00086p-MZ for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 19 Apr 2021 12:04:02 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1lYWNV-00029d-IZ for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 19 Apr 2021 12:04:01 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: martin rudalics Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Mon, 19 Apr 2021 16:04:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 45072 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs Original-Received: via spool by 45072-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B45072.16188481838140 (code B ref 45072); Mon, 19 Apr 2021 16:04:01 +0000 Original-Received: (at 45072) by debbugs.gnu.org; 19 Apr 2021 16:03:03 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:51821 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1lYWMZ-00027E-9z for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 19 Apr 2021 12:03:03 -0400 Original-Received: from mout.gmx.net ([212.227.15.18]:60773) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1lYWMX-00026e-G4 for 45072@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 19 Apr 2021 12:03:01 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=gmx.net; s=badeba3b8450; t=1618848141; bh=r+gFhTBaw3U57kk4wj44PcqAH6NyEBRAe21rSblupgI=; h=X-UI-Sender-Class:Subject:To:Cc:References:From:Date:In-Reply-To; b=CCtWa+boCyAjbzWjqTXcU4QuefhGlL/lbJaI/5PTx38H0/qe7hw8GTC0aSVmMvl7g xDaP+/6+Li1I4+TGF490qhEb6pNFCdA+h7wkMkmNW9V9QCgCT6gBAYp7FsDmP+Rg5G 4PAUnyOtHNLpYjwZnJin8QnnrgzmbK4F1NifX3No= X-UI-Sender-Class: 01bb95c1-4bf8-414a-932a-4f6e2808ef9c Original-Received: from [192.168.1.100] ([212.95.5.140]) by mail.gmx.net (mrgmx004 [212.227.17.190]) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 1MpUUw-1lr3nU47FU-00pxcj; Mon, 19 Apr 2021 18:02:21 +0200 In-Reply-To: Content-Language: en-US X-Provags-ID: V03:K1:YXVXTl3/E+dbSg27jMwq2FeqpQAzwflW4MaJcLIse69jmdJ0VPk OBeKLQiHHTyxB1RQpjMHPMn1m11v4fL67O+p/j0O6bhwWLSMxOBgJDz6luAFxidqLPO569F 3Yw8k0MsQ/CkB3pBjJjaS3Fzjtn46zqhs63vB2Pulv1KV+QvbXpq4useBmvaQCbsQkAx/kC JHOn3YDt6JHkiHMnRT9og== X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V03:K0:q3JmjQkQF7s=:CtCFhe8EamAXipOjQPDwzx 7z9D6lj0VX6y/gdslf2hNkAsJZfcFndezbSWzV0P7D9RuwAC6QWBXEPYj99EAkQ716CrzZwMh VCBhAi6YckUKoUPdKyqZe3bDgSr5FYbbXyJg1uGgtpszpFjC90q79cRTDd657CUUZG5Y0LjRu wW1DLy2gZPPwtUB6yXMzoRuGUcg6nWS1RdQvA4naMK4S+hmJCL8WLxLhXsGVcxTH+FSjpKbI7 YQsyl5kA/TBGIx6MI8topYe6LgS3+9UsdNuQtla4KUQs1albiiErx6zcbyxFsFhnBEqMWf5KN kIeb73BHG6j2NA+t+xLjE2DSUJi/PI7cn9ex839pz9BKZkrQh3BYEj/QcdIClkBHQl4m9DqbR u9/AEzKWKN0OU3rGKqm0WJcwEsJXdpxdcjw3qp8dLSpIyO2hzQr503x3nGmROZKZa78jjILoq Zq99p3Owmzf0oshT1s025uFbgzoWx6kjJt4YdWx0Ofarg/CzXa4DJhbZ4ZO9/gKPnjzk+qwER InA84I5b0nVbFaFRhudUNeQHOzhi41RUaMlC1I2CMXGwqCNXH6IOf0qpPaGbVhFAcT0IVLHiA Q0/kvmFCC+y6IzFMSm13SjfBFo61hwKM7+bbZAHilEUB21FkUwY1G0yrQbqZm8FTcS+6tcSuO NKisZLh4FkM5RCYa8wXGpDKwl/4aR00u+J4e1zi7wTMI4kSMGJHDofUnUTswume2qR7Z52ljS RIJPbrglD+MQJg0GymedA8rdjTXzALRBH5S9MNek096xRzJMZph05OwmpIYKRLT7mERmlppD X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list 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-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "bug-gnu-emacs" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.bugs:204483 Archived-At: >>> But 'minibuffer-hide-completions' uses 'bury-buffer' which would delete >>> the completions window unconditionally even when it was only reused for >>> showing completions. IMO 'bury-buffer' is practically always the wrong >>> choice for Lisp functions to call. >> >> Maybe 'quit-window' is better? > > Part of the problem is one of documentation: it's hard to know which one > to call just by reading the docstrings. > > Also the above quoted text sounds counter intuitive: "bury buffer" > sounds like it's mostly focused on hiding the *buffer*, potentially > hiding the window along the way if necessary, whereas "quit window" > sounds like it's mostly going to eliminate the *window*. That's why Lisp code should call `quit-restore-window' instead of `quit-window'. > Of course, there's also the fact that `quit-window` is fairly new > (introduced in Emacs-24), whereas `bury-buffer` has been with us forever. Both, `bury-buffer' and `quit-window' should be used interactively only. martin