[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: C-x C-v considered harmful
From: |
Johan Bockgård |
Subject: |
Re: C-x C-v considered harmful |
Date: |
Tue, 07 Jul 2009 12:39:51 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.110009 (No Gnus v0.9) Emacs/23.0.94 (gnu/linux) |
"Drew Adams" <address@hidden> writes:
> I wonder if the best approach isn't the suggestion I made to just keep
> the current test for a warning (i.e., modified file buffers), but add
> a user option or two to specify buffers or classes of modified buffers
> (e.g. via regexps) for which warnings would also be issued?
Or just use kill-buffer-query-functions.
- Re: C-x C-v considered harmful, (continued)
- Re: C-x C-v considered harmful, Kevin Rodgers, 2009/07/02
- RE: C-x C-v considered harmful, Drew Adams, 2009/07/02
- RE: C-x C-v considered harmful, Bob Rogers, 2009/07/02
- RE: C-x C-v considered harmful, Drew Adams, 2009/07/02
- RE: C-x C-v considered harmful, Bob Rogers, 2009/07/03
- RE: C-x C-v considered harmful, Drew Adams, 2009/07/03
- RE: C-x C-v considered harmful, Bob Rogers, 2009/07/04
- RE: C-x C-v considered harmful, Drew Adams, 2009/07/05
- RE: C-x C-v considered harmful, Bob Rogers, 2009/07/05
- RE: C-x C-v considered harmful, Drew Adams, 2009/07/05
- Re: C-x C-v considered harmful,
Johan Bockgård <=
- Re: C-x C-v considered harmful, Richard Stallman, 2009/07/05
- RE: C-x C-v considered harmful, Drew Adams, 2009/07/05
- Re: C-x C-v considered harmful, Richard Stallman, 2009/07/04
- RE: C-x C-v considered harmful, Drew Adams, 2009/07/05
- Re: C-x C-v considered harmful, Richard Stallman, 2009/07/06
- RE: C-x C-v considered harmful, Drew Adams, 2009/07/06
- Re: C-x C-v considered harmful, Richard Stallman, 2009/07/07
- Re: C-x C-v considered harmful, Robert J. Chassell, 2009/07/06
- Re: C-x C-v considered harmful, Juri Linkov, 2009/07/06
- RE: C-x C-v considered harmful, Drew Adams, 2009/07/06