From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Stefan Monnier Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: pop-to-buffer-same-window Date: Thu, 01 Sep 2011 22:43:27 -0400 Message-ID: References: <871uw05jfk.fsf@stupidchicken.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1314931420 28140 80.91.229.12 (2 Sep 2011 02:43:40 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 2 Sep 2011 02:43:40 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Chong Yidong Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Sep 02 04:43:35 2011 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@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 1QzJjA-0003rX-K4 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 02 Sep 2011 04:43:32 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:51334 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QzJjA-0006mT-4h for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 01 Sep 2011 22:43:32 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]:33748) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QzJj7-0006iK-QB for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 01 Sep 2011 22:43:30 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QzJj6-0005vP-UF for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 01 Sep 2011 22:43:29 -0400 Original-Received: from ironport2-out.teksavvy.com ([206.248.154.181]:37467 helo=ironport2-out.pppoe.ca) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QzJj6-0005vJ-PZ for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 01 Sep 2011 22:43:28 -0400 X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: Av0EAJNCYE64rwMJ/2dsb2JhbABCqFJ4gUABAQQBViMFCwsOJhIUGA0kiAW6A4ZfBKAPhEA X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.68,317,1312171200"; d="scan'208";a="134005505" Original-Received: from 184-175-3-9.dsl.teksavvy.com (HELO ceviche.home) ([184.175.3.9]) by ironport2-out.pppoe.ca with ESMTP/TLS/ADH-AES256-SHA; 01 Sep 2011 22:43:27 -0400 Original-Received: by ceviche.home (Postfix, from userid 20848) id 817C1660B6; Thu, 1 Sep 2011 22:43:27 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: <871uw05jfk.fsf@stupidchicken.com> (Chong Yidong's message of "Thu, 01 Sep 2011 12:14:23 -0400") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.0.50 (gnu/linux) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. X-Received-From: 206.248.154.181 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 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.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:143705 Archived-At: > Was there any particular reason for adding a separate > pop-to-buffer-same-window function, as opposed to adding an additional > meaning to pop-to-buffer's OTHER-WINDOW argument, i.e. > (pop-to-buffer buffer 'same-window) I think the reason was so as to avoid adding some special handling for a new special value `same-window'. This second argument should be a RULE (previously known as ACTION) and the special-case of `not-this-window' is annoying enough. This said, with the new switch-to-buffer's FORCE-SAME-WINDOW, we don't need pop-to-buffer-same-window since switch-to-buffer works just as well. Stefan