[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
bug#18133: Suppressing asynchronous command output
From: |
Eli Zaretskii |
Subject: |
bug#18133: Suppressing asynchronous command output |
Date: |
Wed, 28 Dec 2016 18:01:21 +0200 |
> From: Reuben Thomas <rrt@sc3d.org>
> Date: Tue, 27 Dec 2016 22:21:11 +0000
> Cc: Juri Linkov <juri@linkov.net>, martin rudalics <rudalics@gmx.at>,
> 18133@debbugs.gnu.org
>
> > Why are we hard-coding a certain buffer name in a function that is
> > supposed to be more general, judging by its name and doc string?
> >
> > I found it hard-coded several times in other places, so I hard-coded it
> here. What do you suggest?
>
> I don't see it hard-coded in any context such as this.
>
> I'm not quite sure what you mean by "in any context such as this". I see the
> string repeated in source code,
> and never assigned to a variable name. This seems OK, since strings and
> symbols are pretty much
> interchangeable when of this sort (e.g. not internationalised).
It appears:
. in ibuf-ext.el, as one of several strings users can select
. in tramp-adb.el as a buffer where the shell output should go
. in tramp.el, likewise
. in simple.el, likewise
. in comments in some other files
By contrast, you were hard-coding it in a function that should provide
optional behavior for buffers that are not necessarily related to
shell output. In that context, I think the user should be able to
instruct Emacs about the buffers which should exhibit this behavior.
> I think the regexp against which buffer names are matched in
> comint-make-newly-written-buffer-visible should be customizable, with
> "*Async Shell Command*" being (in) the default value.
>
> This is already the case.
Maybe, but in that case I'm missing something here.
> And another question: where's the user option to turn this feature on
> or off (including the default being off)?
>
> M-x customize-variable RET display-buffer-alist RET
>
> You can tick/untick the option for "*Async Shell Command*", and, when it is
> ticked, the regexp can be edited.
But if I select that, what I get is that the buffer will not be
displayed at all, right? What will trigger its display when it
becomes non-empty? Sorry if I'm missing something obvious.
- bug#18133: Suppressing asynchronous command output, (continued)
- bug#18133: Suppressing asynchronous command output, Juri Linkov, 2016/12/26
- bug#18133: Suppressing asynchronous command output, Reuben Thomas, 2016/12/26
- bug#18133: Suppressing asynchronous command output, Reuben Thomas, 2016/12/26
- bug#18133: Suppressing asynchronous command output, Eli Zaretskii, 2016/12/27
- bug#18133: Suppressing asynchronous command output, Reuben Thomas, 2016/12/27
- bug#18133: Suppressing asynchronous command output, Eli Zaretskii, 2016/12/27
- bug#18133: Suppressing asynchronous command output, Reuben Thomas, 2016/12/27
- bug#18133: Suppressing asynchronous command output,
Eli Zaretskii <=
- bug#18133: Suppressing asynchronous command output, Reuben Thomas, 2016/12/28
- bug#18133: Suppressing asynchronous command output, Eli Zaretskii, 2016/12/29
- bug#18133: Suppressing asynchronous command output, Juri Linkov, 2016/12/29
- bug#18133: Suppressing asynchronous command output, Reuben Thomas, 2016/12/30
- bug#18133: Suppressing asynchronous command output, Eli Zaretskii, 2016/12/30
- bug#18133: Suppressing asynchronous command output, Reuben Thomas, 2016/12/30
- bug#18133: Suppressing asynchronous command output, Juri Linkov, 2016/12/30
- bug#18133: Suppressing asynchronous command output, Reuben Thomas, 2016/12/30
- bug#18133: Suppressing asynchronous command output, Eli Zaretskii, 2016/12/31