Re: Distinguishing between interactive and asynchronous shell buffers

[Barry Margolin]

In article <m2y65ajluo.fsf@gmail.com>, Sean McAfee <eefacm@gmail.com> 
wrote:

> I find that dired is a much better way of navigating around a large
> directory hierarchy than staying in my shell buffer and issuing lots of
> cd/ls commands.  To bring my shell buffer to a directory I've located
> with dired, I wrote an interactive command
> bring-last-shell-buffer-to-this-directory (aliased to "c'mere") which
> locates the most-recently-used shell buffer like this:
> 
>   (let ((buffer (or (loop for buffer being the buffers
>                           if (with-current-buffer buffer 
>                                (eq major-mode 'shell-mode))
>                           return buffer)
>                     (error "No shell buffers!"))))
>     ;; Issue a "cd" command in buffer that sends that shell
>     ;; to the starting buffer's default-directory
> 
> This works great most of the time, but once I started an asynchronous
> shell command after moving around in dired, and when I did M-x c'mere,
> my routine tried to send a cd to the *Async Shell Command* buffer.
> 
> What's the best way to distinguish asynchronous shell command buffers
> from interactive shell buffers?

Why not just look for the buffer named "*shell*"?

-- 
Barry Margolin, barmar@alum.mit.edu
Arlington, MA
*** PLEASE post questions in newsgroups, not directly to me ***
*** PLEASE don't copy me on replies, I'll read them in the group ***