Re: xref and leaving "temporary" buffers open

[Dmitry Gutov]

On 07/25/2015 07:38 PM, Eli Zaretskii wrote:

> I meant 3 devices, not 2.

I swept the third under the "not visible right now". People delete 
windows, we don't promise any semantics of tying buffers to windows.

> And I think all of them together go a long way towards eliminating
> accidental deletion of a buffer the user would like to keep.

Maybe so. But another concern of mine is that every facility that opens 
buffer in this way, will need to offer its own xxx-delete-opened-buffers 
command. And if we try to consolidate those, the result can't be too far 
from actually having the distinction of open vs. loaded buffers, like 
the cache facility proposed here.

I'll try my hand at the implementation of the latter, and we'll see if 
something unexpected comes up.