Re: Does display-buffer display the buffer or not?

[Lennart Borgman]

On Fri, Dec 24, 2010 at 3:41 PM, martin rudalics <address@hidden> wrote:
>>>> Why is the average programmer better at avoiding looping here?
>>> Emacs doesn't pop up the *Backtrace* buffer by default so the "average"
>>> user is not affected.  And the average user is not supposed to customize
>>> `pop-up-frame-function' either.  I intended this as a hint for people
>>> writing, for example, a silly `pop-up-frame-function' so they can find
>>> the cuplrit easier.  And, obviously, if a function is allowed to return
>>> nil, the doc-string of the function should say so.
>>
>> And why is it better not to give an error then?
>
> I don't know whether it's better.  Maybe because, as I tried to explain
> earlier, the error handler would call `display-buffer' and fail the same
> way.

And in response to that I said that then it is left to every
programmer using display-buffer to handle this very uncommon cases
instead.