[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: The window-pub branch
From: |
grischka |
Subject: |
Re: The window-pub branch |
Date: |
Thu, 18 Nov 2010 22:29:38 +0100 |
User-agent: |
Thunderbird 2.0.0.23 (Windows/20090812) |
martin rudalics wrote:
So why do you think it's gone? You can define
(defun display-buffer-in-other-window-on-same-frame (buffer specifiers)
(display-buffer
"*scratch*"
'(same-frame (reuse-buffer-window . nil) (not-this-window . t))))
and put this into `display-buffer-names' or `display-buffer-regexps' or
write
(display-buffer "*scratch*" 'display-buffer-in-other-window-on-same-frame)
I don't want display "*scratch*". I want
(setq display-buffer-regexps '(((".*") my-display-buffer)))
;-)
> Also, is it possible to route any other functions that effect to
> displaying a buffer (such as switch-to-buffer) through display-buffer
> exclusively?
With the exception of `switch-to-buffer' all these route now through
`display-buffer'. I could add an option to have `switch-to-buffer'
> route through `display-buffer' as well.
One exception is still an exception. Why do you need it?
Also, what method does your code use to display "*compilation*"?
It doesn't seem to like my-display-buffer.
`set-window-buffer' can't be rewritten, for obvious reasons.
Why not? You could rename the current low-level one to
"set-window-buffer-internal".
> Also, is it possible to have same logic to "un-display" (hide) a
> buffer, such that delete-buffer and bury-buffer are routed through
> that, also exclusively? And then to have a hook too, such as
> "hide-buffer-function"?
Hiding a buffer is done by `replace-buffer-in-windows' which is called
by `kill-buffer' (I suppose you mean that by "delete-buffer"). I don't
understand the semantics of `bury-buffer' well enough. What would you
want to put on that hook?
Obviously some code to replace a buffer in its window(s) rsp. delete
the window(s).
> And yes, that would be to bypass all the interesting logic you just
> designed and to replace it with something completely different. ;)
IIUC only your first issue fits into this remark. The routing issue you
raised goes into the opposite direction, I presume.
No, same direction. Obviously only what is routed through the same
function can be catched by a single hook in that function.
And the "hiding"
logic was redesigned (confer `switch-to-prev-buffer') but it's only
loosely connected to buffer display proper.
IMO strongly symmetrically related.
So, is it possible to hook 'switch-to-prev-buffer' in order to catch
buffer "undisplay", with no exception?
Also, while we're at it: I think I want hooks for "select-window",
"set-window-buffer" and finally "split-window", too.
martin
- Re: The window-pub branch, grischka, 2010/11/18
- Re: The window-pub branch, martin rudalics, 2010/11/18
- Re: The window-pub branch,
grischka <=
- Re: The window-pub branch, martin rudalics, 2010/11/19
- Re: The window-pub branch, grischka, 2010/11/19
- Re: The window-pub branch, martin rudalics, 2010/11/19
- Re: The window-pub branch, grischka, 2010/11/19
- Re: The window-pub branch, martin rudalics, 2010/11/20
- Re: The window-pub branch, grischka, 2010/11/20
- Re: The window-pub branch, martin rudalics, 2010/11/20
- Re: The window-pub branch, grischka, 2010/11/20
- Re: The window-pub branch, martin rudalics, 2010/11/21
- Re: The window-pub branch, grischka, 2010/11/21