[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
bug#52467: 29.0.50; Use pop-to-buffer for shell
From: |
Lars Ingebrigtsen |
Subject: |
bug#52467: 29.0.50; Use pop-to-buffer for shell |
Date: |
Sun, 26 Dec 2021 12:35:49 +0100 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/29.0.50 (gnu/linux) |
Dmitry Gutov <dgutov@yandex.ru> writes:
> Or to approach the question from another angle, the difference between
> that behavior and the current one is that you can create two windows
> that show the same buffer. Do we want that to happen with 'M-x shell'
> without prefix?
That's how it works today, and it's a simple and predictable way to act
for this command.
> Overall, pop-to-buffer seems more common than pop-to-buffer-same-window.
Well, I think it depends on the command, really. If it's a command
that's usually used to pop up a new secondary window while you're still
expected to keep on working in the current buffer later, then we pop,
otherwise we switch. And `M-x shell' is in the "switch" category --
it's a "new action", not "something I'm doing for a bit before going
back to this buffer".
> The downside of using it, though, is that the current window is
> unlikely to be used even if the buffer is not displayed anywhere else
> (the algorithm chooses something like LRU window). Maybe we should
> choose a mode of operation where it does use the current window,
> unless the buffer is displayed somewhere else.
>
> Something like
>
> (pop-to-buffer buffer
> '((display-buffer-reuse-window
> display-buffer-same-window)
> (inhibit-same-window . nil)))
I think that's more unpredictable. What happens currently is very regular.
--
(domestic pets only, the antidote for overdose, milk.)
bloggy blog: http://lars.ingebrigtsen.no
- bug#52467: 29.0.50; Use pop-to-buffer for shell, Steingold, 2021/12/13
- bug#52467: 29.0.50; Use pop-to-buffer for shell, Dmitry Gutov, 2021/12/13
- bug#52467: 29.0.50; Use pop-to-buffer for shell, Theodor Thornhill, 2021/12/14
- bug#52467: 29.0.50; Use pop-to-buffer for shell, Lars Ingebrigtsen, 2021/12/19
- bug#52467: 29.0.50; Use pop-to-buffer for shell, Dmitry Gutov, 2021/12/19
- Message not available
- bug#52467: 29.0.50; Use pop-to-buffer for shell, Lars Ingebrigtsen, 2021/12/20
- bug#52467: 29.0.50; Use pop-to-buffer for shell, Sam Steingold, 2021/12/23
- bug#52467: 29.0.50; Use pop-to-buffer for shell, Dmitry Gutov, 2021/12/23
- bug#52467: 29.0.50; Use pop-to-buffer for shell, Lars Ingebrigtsen, 2021/12/24
- bug#52467: 29.0.50; Use pop-to-buffer for shell, Dmitry Gutov, 2021/12/25
- bug#52467: 29.0.50; Use pop-to-buffer for shell,
Lars Ingebrigtsen <=
- bug#52467: 29.0.50; Use pop-to-buffer for shell, Dmitry Gutov, 2021/12/26
- bug#52467: 29.0.50; Use pop-to-buffer for shell, Sam Steingold, 2021/12/26
- bug#52467: 29.0.50; Use pop-to-buffer for shell, jakanakaevangeli, 2021/12/27
- bug#52467: 29.0.50; Use pop-to-buffer for shell, Lars Ingebrigtsen, 2021/12/27
bug#52467: 29.0.50; Use pop-to-buffer for shell, jakanakaevangeli, 2021/12/14