[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: tags-loop-continue
From: |
Dmitry Gutov |
Subject: |
Re: tags-loop-continue |
Date: |
Fri, 22 Jan 2016 13:13:20 +0300 |
User-agent: |
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:44.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/44.0 |
On 01/22/2016 09:59 AM, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
And if someone asks for it back, ask them to go fix bug#20489 first.
I was about to suggest this myself. So yes, let's do that. If we
indeed try harder to leave the *xref* buffer visible, the need for
this integration would be lower.
On the other hand, while *xref* is visible, `next-error' will keep
working for its results (it's item 1 in next-error-find-buffer).
That's how `next-error' stayed useful for e.g. *compilation* all these
years. And it's fairly handy to call `next-error' to go to the next
result, without having to switch back to *compilation*.
So, do we really remove the integration? Up to you.
diff --git a/lisp/progmodes/xref.el b/lisp/progmodes/xref.el
index 2bccd85..1d71d24 100644
--- a/lisp/progmodes/xref.el
+++ b/lisp/progmodes/xref.el
@@ -600,22 +600,8 @@ xref--xref-buffer-mode-map
(define-derived-mode xref--xref-buffer-mode special-mode "XREF"
"Mode for displaying cross-references."
(setq buffer-read-only t)
- (setq next-error-function #'xref--next-error-function)
(setq next-error-last-buffer (current-buffer)))
-(defun xref--next-error-function (n reset?)
- (when reset?
- (goto-char (point-min)))
- (let ((backward (< n 0))
- (n (abs n))
- (xref nil))
- (dotimes (_ n)
- (setq xref (xref--search-property 'xref-item backward)))
- (cond (xref
- (xref--pop-to-location xref))
- (t
- (error "No %s xref" (if backward "previous" "next"))))))
-
(defun xref-quit (&optional kill)
"Bury temporarily displayed buffers, then quit the current window.
- Re: tags-loop-continue, (continued)
- Re: tags-loop-continue, Eli Zaretskii, 2016/01/21
- Re: tags-loop-continue, Dmitry Gutov, 2016/01/21
- Re: tags-loop-continue, Eli Zaretskii, 2016/01/21
- Re: tags-loop-continue, Dmitry Gutov, 2016/01/21
- Re: tags-loop-continue, Eli Zaretskii, 2016/01/21
- Re: tags-loop-continue, Dmitry Gutov, 2016/01/21
- Re: tags-loop-continue, Eli Zaretskii, 2016/01/21
- Re: tags-loop-continue, Dmitry Gutov, 2016/01/21
- Re: tags-loop-continue, Dmitry Gutov, 2016/01/21
- Re: tags-loop-continue, Eli Zaretskii, 2016/01/22
- Re: tags-loop-continue,
Dmitry Gutov <=
- Re: tags-loop-continue, Eli Zaretskii, 2016/01/22
- Re: tags-loop-continue, John Wiegley, 2016/01/22
- Re: tags-loop-continue, Dmitry Gutov, 2016/01/22
- next-error-function integration in xref removed, Dmitry Gutov, 2016/01/23
- Re: next-error-function integration in xref removed, John Wiegley, 2016/01/26
- Re: tags-loop-continue, John Wiegley, 2016/01/21
- Re: tags-loop-continue, Dmitry Gutov, 2016/01/21
- Re: tags-loop-continue, John Wiegley, 2016/01/22
- Re: tags-loop-continue, Dmitry Gutov, 2016/01/21
- Re: tags-loop-continue, Eli Zaretskii, 2016/01/21