[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: |
Thu, 09 Jul 2009 02:28:48 +0300 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.1.50 (x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) |
> 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.)
This can be handled by the following code:
(add-hook 'kill-buffer-query-functions 'process-kill-buffer-query-function)
(defun process-kill-buffer-query-function ()
"Ask before killing a buffer that has an active process."
(let ((process (get-buffer-process (current-buffer))))
(or (not process)
(not (memq (process-status process) '(run stop open listen)))
(not (process-query-on-exit-flag process))
(yes-or-no-p "Buffer has an active process; kill it? "))))
It fixes both cases: killing a shell buffer as reported by OP,
and killing a *Async Shell Command* buffer as I reported.
The reason for doing this is the same as why exiting Emacs
with `C-x C-c' asks a question about killing active processes.
Active processes has the same worth to be asked a confirmation
regardless whether they are killed with `C-x k', `C-x C-v' or `C-x C-c'.
The variable `kill-buffer-query-functions' is nil by default,
so maybe it's better to implement this confirmation in Fkill_buffer
instead of the hook `kill-buffer-query-functions'?
--
Juri Linkov
http://www.jurta.org/emacs/
- RE: C-x C-v considered harmful, (continued)
- 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
- Re: C-x C-v considered harmful, Juri Linkov, 2009/07/07
- Re: C-x C-v considered harmful,
Juri Linkov <=
- 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
- Re: C-x C-v considered harmful, Miles Bader, 2009/07/02