From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Stefan Monnier Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#9532: 24.0.50; `special-display-regexps' is no longer respected Date: Thu, 22 Sep 2011 08:29:18 -0400 Message-ID: References: <9202F08DB196437E8AD75A3C535E5A7D@us.oracle.com> <87y5xlg9xq.fsf@stupidchicken.com> <1D79C6CD14EE4C76B74C446E04B9CA65@us.oracle.com> <85680E6E160C472FBC47C2FDA86BA171@us.oracle.com> <874o05x4l6.fsf@stupidchicken.com> <87obydeoj7.fsf@stupidchicken.com> <8739fp6z4h.fsf@stupidchicken.com> <87zkhxnt7h.fsf@stupidchicken.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1316694597 11554 80.91.229.12 (22 Sep 2011 12:29:57 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 22 Sep 2011 12:29:57 +0000 (UTC) Cc: 9532@debbugs.gnu.org To: Chong Yidong Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu Sep 22 14:29:53 2011 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([140.186.70.17]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1R6iPU-00014t-3T for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Thu, 22 Sep 2011 14:29:48 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:48725 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1R6iPT-0004ej-JG for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Thu, 22 Sep 2011 08:29:47 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]:34949) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1R6iPP-0004aO-LU for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Thu, 22 Sep 2011 08:29:44 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1R6iPO-0002JI-BM for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Thu, 22 Sep 2011 08:29:43 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.43]:55489) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1R6iPO-0002JD-7Q for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Thu, 22 Sep 2011 08:29:42 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1R6iPi-0007Jz-Fn for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Thu, 22 Sep 2011 08:30:02 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Stefan Monnier Original-Sender: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Thu, 22 Sep 2011 12:30:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 9532 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: Original-Received: via spool by 9532-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B9532.131669458128098 (code B ref 9532); Thu, 22 Sep 2011 12:30:02 +0000 Original-Received: (at 9532) by debbugs.gnu.org; 22 Sep 2011 12:29:41 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1R6iPN-0007J9-IP for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 22 Sep 2011 08:29:41 -0400 Original-Received: from ironport2-out.teksavvy.com ([206.248.154.183] helo=ironport2-out.pppoe.ca) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1R6iPL-0007J1-RK for 9532@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 22 Sep 2011 08:29:40 -0400 X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: Av0EABUpe05FpZ7x/2dsb2JhbABCp395gVMBAQQBViMFCwsOJhIUGA0kiAu1FoZ9BKBYhEM X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.68,423,1312171200"; d="scan'208";a="137859728" Original-Received: from 69-165-158-241.dsl.teksavvy.com (HELO pastel.home) ([69.165.158.241]) by ironport2-out.pppoe.ca with ESMTP/TLS/ADH-AES256-SHA; 22 Sep 2011 08:29:18 -0400 Original-Received: by pastel.home (Postfix, from userid 20848) id 197D559234; Thu, 22 Sep 2011 08:29:18 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: <87zkhxnt7h.fsf@stupidchicken.com> (Chong Yidong's message of "Wed, 21 Sep 2011 23:37:06 -0400") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.0.50 (gnu/linux) X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.11 Precedence: list Resent-Date: Thu, 22 Sep 2011 08:30:02 -0400 X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 1) X-Received-From: 140.186.70.43 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.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.bugs:51662 Archived-At: >> So, you agree to the incompatibility for the non-interactive case? That >> is to say, a non-interactive call to switch-to-buffer (and ONLY a >> non-interactive call) will now trigger special display. Previously, in >> Emacs 23, it would use the selected window. Yes. > It just occurred to me that it would be safer to leave switch-to-buffer > unchanged, and instead reinstate pop-to-buffer-same-window specifically > for the callers in question, i.e. the callers who used the > same-window-regexps/display-buffer trick. pop-to-buffer-same-window > would raise a special window for special buffers, instead of using the > selected window; s-t-b would use the selected window, as in Emacs 23. It would also be a change in behavior since same-window-* took precedence over special-display-*. But it would be a good change: users like Drew (and myself) had to set same-window-* to nil to let special-display-* do its job. So I agree those callers who used same-window-* should be changed to obey special-display-*, as for whether callers of switch-to-buffer should also obey special-display-* (and/or display-buffer-alist) I don't know for sure. Basically w.r.t "same-window behavior" we have 3 options: 1- never touch another window. 2- obey special-display-* and display-buffer-alist. 3- use the selected window if at all possible, but fallback to pop-to-buffer instead of signalling an error. The third is the current behavior of interactive uses of switch-to-buffer. The second is the behavior we want for former users of same-window-*. The third is the behavior that corresponds to Emacs-23's switch-to-buffer. We could shoehorn this into the `force-same-window' argument of switch-to-buffer, but I'm not convinced that the difference between options 2 and 3 is worth the trouble. Stefan