[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: C-x C-v considered harmful
From: |
Juri Linkov |
Subject: |
Re: C-x C-v considered harmful |
Date: |
Wed, 08 Jul 2009 03:32:46 +0300 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.1.50 (x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) |
> I thought we had moved forward from the question of `find-alternate-file' to
> the
> question of `kill-buffer'. If you agree, then please, let's phrase the
> discussion that way, going forward.
>
> The question, for each of the particular contexts you cite, is whether
> _`kill-buffer'_ should query/warn. How `kill-buffer' might be called
> is not the point.
I brought these examples to help deciding what a default list of buffers
should require a confirmation. As Johan pointed out it is just a matter
of setting `kill-buffer-query-functions', e.g. in *shell* buffers.
But note that this can be annoying for users who like creating a lot
of shell buffers, so exiting from Emacs will ask a separate confirmation
for each of them. (BTW, `C-x C-c' already asks a confirmation about
shell buffers.)
When doing this also please take care of not adding more confirmations
to existing ones. For instance, currently `C-x C-v' on a modified
file buffer asks a confirmation twice (I think one confirmation
should be enough).
--
Juri Linkov
http://www.jurta.org/emacs/
- Re: C-x C-v considered harmful, (continued)
- 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
- Re: C-x C-v considered harmful,
Juri Linkov <=
- Re: C-x C-v considered harmful, Juri Linkov, 2009/07/08
- RE: C-x C-v considered harmful, Drew Adams, 2009/07/09
- Re: C-x C-v considered harmful, Juri Linkov, 2009/07/09
- RE: C-x C-v considered harmful, Drew Adams, 2009/07/09
- Re: C-x C-v considered harmful, Juri Linkov, 2009/07/09
- RE: C-x C-v considered harmful, Drew Adams, 2009/07/09
- RE: C-x C-v considered harmful, Bob Rogers, 2009/07/10
- Re: C-x C-v considered harmful, Juri Linkov, 2009/07/13
- Re: C-x C-v considered harmful, Juri Linkov, 2009/07/16
- Re: C-x C-v considered harmful, M Jared Finder, 2009/07/02