bug#30: marked as done (Inconsistent behaviour of display-buffer, pop-to-buffer)

[Emacs bug Tracking System]

Your message dated Sun, 04 Jan 2009 20:10:00 +0100
with message-id <49610988.9000607@gmx.at>
and subject line Re: Inconsistent behaviour of display-buffer, pop-to-buffer
has caused the Emacs bug report #30,
regarding Inconsistent behaviour of display-buffer, pop-to-buffer
to be marked as done.

This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.

(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact owner@emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com
immediately.)


-- 
30: http://emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=30
Emacs Bug Tracking System
Contact owner@emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com with problems
> --- Begin Message ---
>
>
>
> Subject: 
>
> Inconsistent behaviour of display-buffer, pop-to-buffer
>
>
>
>
> Date: 
>
> Sat, 01 Mar 2008 04:27:23 +0000
>
>
>
>
> When running Emacs on either X or Mac OS X:
>
> ;; Similar to display-buffer-other-frame, but without all the
> ;; raise-frame, make-frame-{in,}visible stuff.  The point is to
> ;; illustrate annoyingly inconsistent behaviour of display-buffer.
> (defun my-display-buffer (buf)
>   (let ((pop-up-frames t)
>         same-window-buffer-names
>         same-window-regexps)
>     (display-buffer buf t)))
>
> Create but don't display a buffer named "foo":
> (get-buffer-create "foo")
>
> Pop up a new frame, selected and WITH focus:
> (my-display-buffer "foo")
>
> Go back to the original frame with C-x 5 o
>
> Pop up the "foo" frame, selected but WITHOUT focus this time:
> (my-display-buffer "foo")
>
> ????
>
> Again, go back to the original frame with C-x 5 o and also do
> C-x b foo RET to make "foo" the current buffer.  Two issues this time.
> The other "foo" frame is not raised but a new frame is unnecessarily
> created (the doc says that pop-up-frames means that visible and
> iconified frames should be searched).  Also, the newly created frame
> is WITH focus this time:
> (my-display-buffer "foo")
>
> The same inconsistent behaviour happens if you substitute
> pop-to-buffer for display-buffer in the definition of
> my-display-buffer, which seems definitely buggy because the doc for
> pop-to-buffer says that it should select the buffer.
>
> In GNU Emacs 22.1.1 (powerpc-apple-darwin8.9.0, Carbon Version 1.6.0)
>  of 2007-06-08
> -- 
>   Otto Maddox
>   ottomaddox@fastmail.fm
>
> -- 
> http://www.fastmail.fm - The professional email service
>
>
>
>
>
> --- End Message ---
> --- Begin Message ---
>
>
>
> Subject: 
>
> Re: Inconsistent behaviour of display-buffer, pop-to-buffer
>
>
>
>
> Date: 
>
> Sun, 04 Jan 2009 20:10:00 +0100
>
>
>
>
> User-agent: 
>
> Thunderbird 2.0.0.16 (Windows/20080708)
>
>
>
>
> This bug should now have been resolved for CVS Emacs by the following
> two fixes:
>
> 2008-09-11  Martin Rudalics  <rudalics@gmx.at>
>
>         * window.el (pop-to-buffer): If the window for buffer-or-name is
>         not on the selected frame, raise that window's frame and give it
>         input focus.  (Bug#745)
>
> 2009-01-04  Martin Rudalics  <rudalics@gmx.at>
>
>         * window.el (display-buffer): When a buffer is displayed in the
>         selected and some other window, and not-this-window is non-nil,
>         try to return that other window instead of popping up a new
>         frame.  (Bug#30)
>
> Thanks for reporting, martin.
>
>
> --- End Message ---