bug#69993: Wrap window buffers while cycling

[Juri Linkov]

>>> (1) The classic behavior where switching may show a buffer never shown
>>>      in the window before.  I suppose you mean that
>>>      'switch-to-prev-buffer-wrap' does not affect it.  If that's the
>>>      case, please say so.
>>
>> Indeed, 'switch-to-prev-buffer-wrap' does not affect it.
>> Switching to a buffer that was never shown in the window
>> should still reset the list of next-buffers to nil.
>>
>>> (2) The new behavior where switching may only show buffers shown in that
>>>      window before.  For this you want to either wrap or not.  So the
>>>      option 'switch-to-prev-buffer-wrap' will affect (2) only.  Right?
>>
>> 'switch-to-prev-buffer-wrap' will affect only 'C-x C-left' and 'C-x C-right'
>> cycling buffers shown in that window before.
>
> I'm still confused.  Do you mean that C-x b, when it switches to a
> buffer previously shown in that window, should not change the ordering
> of buffers previously shown in that window?  And behave so if and only
> if 'switch-to-prev-buffer-wrap' is non-nil?  Then what would users do if
> they (1) want to use your new option but (2) still want C-x b or C-x
> C-left make that buffer the most previously used one in that window?

Sorry for the confusion.  This feature request was only about C-x C-left.
C-x b was just speculation about a possible separate option.