[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
bug#11298: 24.0.95; (WISH) Re-look scratch buffers
From: |
Jambunathan K |
Subject: |
bug#11298: 24.0.95; (WISH) Re-look scratch buffers |
Date: |
Sun, 22 Apr 2012 02:20:01 +0530 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.0.95 (windows-nt) |
Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> writes:
>> 1. Allow multiple scratch buffers one for each mode the user is
>> interested in.
>
> We do not disallow that, so could you be more specific in what you mean
> by that?
>
Instead of creating one scratch buffer, make changes such a way that N
scratch buffers are created. N = 0, 1, 2, 3 etc etc.
>> The defcustom can have a solitary text-mode entry.
>
> Which defcustom?
This defcustom will be newly introduced as part of this change. Let's
call it `scratch-buffer-modes'. With the below setting,
(setq scratch-buffer-modes '(emacs-lisp-mode org-mode))
I will get 2 scratch buffers by default on startup. One *org-scratch*
in org-mode and one *emacs-lisp-scratch* in emacs-lisp mode.
If someone is unhappy with having any scratch buffers at all, then one
could just do a
(setq scratch-buffer-mode nil)
>> C-u C-x b can offer to create *scratch-%s* (or %s-scratch) in
>> %s-mode.
>
> Interesting idea. It might not even need a C-u: we could simply make
> C-x b query the user for a major-mode when the buffer doesn't exist yet
> (and we could try and take a hint from the buffer name to guess a good
> default: e.g. looking for a major-mode name in the buffer name, or
> matching the buffer name against auto-mode-alist).
Whatever is chosen, this prompt "No buffer matching whatever, create one
(y/n)?" should be removed. This is annoying. I am not destroying
things. I am not sure why the world is against people creating stuff
:-).
A sensible name *must* be offered, which I can just RET with possibly a
minor modification.
>> 3. I think it is not the scratch buffer that is idiosyncratic but the
>> /name/. Instead of using scratch one could call it say a notes
>> buffer or a temp buffer.
>
> I'm not married to "*scratch*", but "notes" sounds like something you'd
> want to save, and "temp" sounds like something that might disappear
> without warning.
May be, marry scratch buffer with emacs-lock-mode...
I don't use persistent scratch buffers.
A persistent scratch buffer could be same as what we now call an
`initial-buffer-choice'. Only difference is that the file is
~/.emacs.d/scratch ("secretly" chosen by the Emacs).
- bug#11298: 24.0.95; (WISH) Re-look scratch buffers, Jambunathan K, 2012/04/21
- bug#11298: 24.0.95; (WISH) Re-look scratch buffers, Stefan Monnier, 2012/04/21
- bug#11298: 24.0.95; (WISH) Re-look scratch buffers,
Jambunathan K <=
- bug#11298: 24.0.95; (WISH) Re-look scratch buffers, Stefan Monnier, 2012/04/23
- bug#11298: 24.0.95; (WISH) Re-look scratch buffers, Lennart Borgman, 2012/04/23
- bug#11298: 24.0.95; (WISH) Re-look scratch buffers, Drew Adams, 2012/04/23
- bug#11298: 24.0.95; (WISH) Re-look scratch buffers, Stefan Monnier, 2012/04/23
- bug#11298: 24.0.95; (WISH) Re-look scratch buffers, Drew Adams, 2012/04/24
bug#11298: Recipe to surface *code-conversion-work* buffer, Jambunathan K, 2012/04/24