From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Richard Riley Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.help Subject: Re: emacs mode line suggestions Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2008 00:35:58 +0100 Organization: A noiseless patient Spider Message-ID: References: <15962952-6180-41bd-abce-1b919aa55807@v13g2000pro.googlegroups.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1226878850 32687 80.91.229.12 (16 Nov 2008 23:40:50 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 16 Nov 2008 23:40:50 +0000 (UTC) To: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Original-X-From: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Nov 17 00:41:52 2008 Return-path: Envelope-to: geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1L1rFX-0003OT-CK for geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Mon, 17 Nov 2008 00:41:51 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:56896 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1L1rEO-00052j-UD for geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Sun, 16 Nov 2008 18:40:40 -0500 Original-Path: news.stanford.edu!headwall.stanford.edu!news.glorb.com!news.eternal-september.org!news.motzarella.org!motzarella.org!news.motzarella.org!not-for-mail Original-Newsgroups: gnu.emacs.help Original-Lines: 51 Original-X-Trace: news.motzarella.org U2FsdGVkX1+u9pBBb8RCZGHpsME3pGFwo41rqpHFFrBw+TmzMkMXEsARa0hs5HVsShYIiGDdWhi7xaV/P+rpXeGraUZf2wGaA3oeWmsN5vq79VFkwo12Zs07T87VknKkm0eLqruydlv38wh1Pkg5Mg== Original-X-Complaints-To: Please send complaints to abuse@motzarella.org with full headers Original-NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 16 Nov 2008 23:36:27 +0000 (UTC) X-Auth-Sender: U2FsdGVkX18zJj8OsBU6PYobbHqTpZh4tTTVTkp3l1OR1KSUR/LJzw== Cancel-Lock: sha1:Gvg44qHP1Oiem/o0v+uwrlxOS30= User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.0.60 (gnu/linux) Original-Xref: news.stanford.edu gnu.emacs.help:164518 X-BeenThere: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Users list for the GNU Emacs text editor List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.help:59849 Archived-At: Ian Eure writes: > On Nov 16, 2008, at 10:20 AM, Richard Riley wrote: > >> Ian Eure writes: >>> >>> My objection is to the idea that you don't want star buffers in the >>> list. These are also used for interaction with external processes: >>> *ssh: host*, *SQL: foo*, *Twit-recent*, *compilation*, *shell*, >>> *Python*. It seems ill advised to exclude those from the list. >> >> The kind of user that might want to see them is clued in enough to >> use a >> prefix or customise their setup accordingly. >> > That's not the point. A behavior is being suggested which has a > serious usability negative. Your argument cuts both ways; anyone who > might use the existing mechanism surely is clued in enough to know how > to use it, so why bother changing it, either? > > Consider: > > 1. Edit stuff. > 2. Create a *shell* buffer, do work in the shell. > 3. Switch back to editing. > 4. Try to go back to the shell - but wait, it's gone! What happened? > > It's equally confusing. If you want to improve things, great, but > replacing one crappy behavior with a different crappy behavior is a > waste. Not really. The buffer list does get large. I use IDO and that works well enough. But you are arguing how it would be if you keep the shell as it is. Another way might be simply to have a regexp to show which buffers are included - in fact I would be surprised if it wasnt already there:-; I was merely idly agreeing with Xah that the default list of ALL buffers might not be right one. It should be a more advanced one. > > >> I must say I agree with Xah and the "well thats the way its always >> been" >> kind of reply is not constructive in the slightest. >> > Did you actually read my reply? Because I criticized the proposal on > it's merits, and never said anything remotely like that. I was not referring to your reply. I was referring to the thread. Your reply was fair and considered.