From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.ciao.gmane.io!not-for-mail From: Stefan Monnier Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Quit and Close Emacs Special Windows Date: Tue, 30 Jun 2020 00:27:18 -0400 Message-ID: References: <87ftaej5pp.fsf.ref@ergus.i-did-not-set--mail-host-address--so-tickle-me> <87ftaej5pp.fsf@ergus.i-did-not-set--mail-host-address--so-tickle-me> <3c578050-2a23-411e-bad0-c26a7c7ed5ee@default> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="ciao.gmane.io:159.69.161.202"; logging-data="48366"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/28.0.50 (gnu/linux) Cc: Ergus , emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Drew Adams Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Tue Jun 30 06:27:59 2020 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@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 1jq7sE-000CSj-C3 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Tue, 30 Jun 2020 06:27:58 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:35768 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jq7sD-00067m-Ep for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Tue, 30 Jun 2020 00:27:57 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:44604) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jq7rh-0005iP-Ji for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 30 Jun 2020 00:27:25 -0400 Original-Received: from mailscanner.iro.umontreal.ca ([132.204.25.50]:32352) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jq7rf-0003pA-Fq for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 30 Jun 2020 00:27:24 -0400 Original-Received: from pmg1.iro.umontreal.ca (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by pmg1.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 0B62010033A; Tue, 30 Jun 2020 00:27:22 -0400 (EDT) Original-Received: from mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (unknown [172.31.2.1]) by pmg1.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 4DF44100283; Tue, 30 Jun 2020 00:27:20 -0400 (EDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=iro.umontreal.ca; s=mail; t=1593491240; bh=LjKPqmIj5ZsW8v4jxA64pdK6m2aiOfgAGbRcSFIuFiE=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:References:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=K2naX+lmBxYRTY2OnQ/vop5u41sM+QH/VVDgCWSCn/Hg1H1tU4lYoXcHS6ghHm1KD 0ORsm/1Do4vHYKxp36EXtTa43zoVUvlbFWP+yKFZC3k+MvqvP1/Sd7jqrKcvmiI4mf YO0miQ3o45LvGQBO3NomQnHm4lgjG61lwVMykL2DBRR3D1A08NZy4BqEDBeWqZg+4y 5Z613HgvrDtXApAatSOb01ORTAN53LU0eT3jHYspZIP1DLhUEjJ9AHNV5ivOwqEIaZ 8RUlwXCMJnGTDGo82zz1MgT6N4Qv4iwovjPWXPdQULRkVRurOt6ectoG15EDnIckAR f8vrMp/8i1Psw== Original-Received: from alfajor (unknown [157.52.0.200]) by mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id E2FDF1203FD; Tue, 30 Jun 2020 00:27:19 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: (Drew Adams's message of "Tue, 30 Jun 2020 03:24:02 +0000 (UTC)") Received-SPF: pass client-ip=132.204.25.50; envelope-from=monnier@iro.umontreal.ca; helo=mailscanner.iro.umontreal.ca X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: First seen = 2020/06/29 22:35:25 X-ACL-Warn: Detected OS = Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Spam_score_int: -42 X-Spam_score: -4.3 X-Spam_bar: ---- X-Spam_report: (-4.3 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001 autolearn=_AUTOLEARN X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:252582 Archived-At: > If it doesn't, please ignore. I thought it did > (and I thought Ergus thought so too). Sorry if > I was mistaken. > > I thought he was asking about having `q' in such > buffers delete the window more often, instead of > preferring to restore some other buffer in it. Maybe it does have to do with it, I don't know. There's much too much implicit in those messages. Please clarify. E.g. Ergus says: I know it is just a detail, but in some cases (like when using man or compile mode, or reading a function documentation, or after executing magit commands) it doesn't make sense to keep the buffer in the buffer list after pressing q in 90% of the times. so to me it seems like this doesn't have to do with whether windows get deleted but with whether buffers are kept (maybe at all, or maybe only in the buffer lists). Stefan