Re: 22.1.90; desktop-save throws (error "No buffer named <uniquified buffername>")

[Stefan Monnier]

>> No, the whole point of the function is to provide a meaningful
>> functionality independently from desktop.el.
> As there are no other users, we don't know if it is more useful and
> general to return nil for empty basenames or to return "".

We know that one is meaningful: it indicates that the buffer name *is*
under uniquify's control.

>> Exactly: *to desktop* this is so, but not in general, so the test
>> belongs in desktop.el.

> There are no general uses of `uniquify-buffer-base-name'. There is no
> general definition of a "base name", it is an internal thing of
> uniquify;

It's not linked to its implementation but to its featureset, so it's
"specific" to uniquify, but not "internal".  Which is why it's a good
interface which stands on its own, whether or not desktop.el is its
only user.

Please undo your change to uniquify and move the test to desktop.el.


        Stefan