|
From: | Juri Linkov |
Subject: | Re: Bug in clone-indirect-buffer and clone-indirect-buffer-other-window |
Date: | Mon, 23 Jan 2006 03:57:23 +0200 |
User-agent: | Gnus/5.110004 (No Gnus v0.4) Emacs/22.0.50 (gnu/linux) |
> I had not noticed that clone-indirect-buffer-other-window asked the > user to specify the name of the buffer to start with. That seems like > a big inconsistency. Normally the only difference between foobar and > foobar-other window is where to display the results. > > I see that clone-indirect-buffer-other-window is documented wrongly in > the manual, based on the assumption that it does what its name > suggests. > > So I think the right thing is to replace its definition with this: > > (defun clone-indirect-buffer-other-window (newname display-flag &optional > norecord) > "Like `clone-indirect-buffer' but display in another window." > (interactive > (progn > (if (get major-mode 'no-clone-indirect) > (error "Cannot indirectly clone a buffer in %s mode" mode-name)) > (list (if current-prefix-arg > (read-string "BName of indirect buffer: ")) > t))) > (let ((pop-up-windows t)) > (clone-indirect-buffer newname display-flag norecord))) This has only one drawback of being backward incompatible. I don't know how many users rely on the current function arguments. -- Juri Linkov http://www.jurta.org/emacs/
[Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread] |