Re: annoyances

[Uday S Reddy <u.s.reddy@cs.bham.ac.uk>]

On 8/15/2010 11:06 AM, David Kastrup wrote:

> Well, don't use `o' then.  Duh.  That's what C-o is for.

Ok, I either didn't know about C-o or forgot all about it.  I will go rebind it 
to `o' before I forget again.

But, I believe that this is a more widespread problem than dired.

> Unfortunately, C-o has the side effect of loading the file into a
> buffer.  And the buffer then stays around.  It would be nice to have
> dired record when a buffer only becomes populated by C-o and kill it
> when the window gets deleted or reassociated without the buffer ever
> becoming the current buffer.
>
> `o' currently has the advantage that you can move back into dired using
> C-x 4 0 (why doesn't C-x 4 k work?  That binding is quite more mnemonic)
> and get rid of the buffer that way.

Yes, good ideas indeed.

Cheers,
Uday