bug#65797: `buffer-match-p` should not use `func-arity`

[Philip Kaludercic]

Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> writes:

> retitle 65797 `buffer-match-p` should not use `func-arity`
> thanks
>
>> (match-buffers (apply-partially #'local-variable-p 'foo))
>
> Note that this call is incorrect according to the docstring of
> `buffer-match-p`, which says:
>
>     CONDITION is either:
>     [...]
>     - a predicate function that takes BUFFER-OR-NAME and ARG as
>       arguments, and returns non-nil if the buffer matches,
>
> IOW, you have to pass a function that accepts 2 arguments, whereas your
> (apply-partially #'local-variable-p 'foo) only accepts one.
>
> The Texinfo docs instead say:
>
>     @item
>     A predicate function, which should return non-@code{nil} if the buffer
>     matches.  If the function expects one argument, it is called with
>     @var{buffer-or-name} as the argument; if it expects 2 arguments, the
>     first argument is @var{buffer-or-name} and the second is @var{arg}
>     (or @code{nil} if @var{arg} is omitted).
>
> but in general we can't reliably decide whether "the function expects
> one argument", so we can't implement the above promise in a reliable way.
> `apply-partially` is just one case where this shows up, but the problem
> is much more general.
> `buffer-match-p` uses the `func-arity` hack to try to make it work with
> some functions of 1 argument, but it's just a hack.
>
> We should get rid of this hack.  Here are some possible replacements
> (by order of my preference):
>
> - Replace `&optional arg` with `&rest args` and pass those args via
>   `apply`, so the number of args passed doesn't depend on the function
>   but on the caller.
> - Always pass both args to the function (i.e. as documented in the
>   docstring).
> - Get rid of `&optional arg` altogether.
>   AFAICT, most callers don't use it, but it's used for
>   `display-buffer-alist`, so it would have further consequences there :-(

FWIW The intention here was to be able and specify simpler conditions
that don't have to handle the alist.

> - Use a hack like
>
>       (condition-case nil (funcall condition buffer-or-name arg)
>         (wrong-number-of-arguments (funcall condition buffer-or-name)))
>
>   which handles the arity mismatch a bit more reliably, but at the cost of
>   occasionally running the function twice.
>
>
>         Stefan