[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: why pop-to-buffer has this ugly behavior?
From: |
Klaus Berndl |
Subject: |
Re: why pop-to-buffer has this ugly behavior? |
Date: |
22 Jan 2004 19:43:49 +0100 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.3 |
Oops, please excuse making such noise..... next time i should switch on my
brain before complaining ;-)
Just examined the value of same-window-regexps........... which contains a
regexp for these *Customize...* buffers...
Please ignore my previous posting and please excuse!
<Blush>
Klaus
On 22 Jan 2004, Klaus Berndl wrote:
>
> This is the implementation of custom-create-buffer in GNU Emacs 21.3:
>
> ,----
> | (defun custom-buffer-create (options &optional name description)
> | "Create a buffer containing OPTIONS.
> | Optional NAME is the name of the buffer.
> | OPTIONS should be an alist of the form ((SYMBOL WIDGET)...), where
> | SYMBOL is a customization option, and WIDGET is a widget for editing
> | that option."
> | (unless name (setq name "*Customization*"))
> | (kill-buffer (get-buffer-create name))
> | (pop-to-buffer (get-buffer-create name))
> | (custom-buffer-create-internal options description))
> `----
>
> I have wondered why here pop-to-buffer does not split the unsplitted window
> in my frame. Then i have tested the following (The value of
> `pop-up-windows' is t!):
>
> (pop-to-buffer (get-buffer-create "*BlaBlaBla*"))
>
> which splits an unsplitted window in 2 windows - well!
>
> (pop-to-buffer (get-buffer-create "*Customization*"))
>
> which does not split an unsplitted windows in 2 - very bad and ugly!
>
> Conclusion: pop-up-buffer must have somewhere in the c-code - or maybe
> display-buffer) but anyway - some logic which decides dependent on the
> buffer-name if the window should be splitted or not?! I write this not to
> the bug-list because it is not really a bug but it is a strong violation of
> one of the most important design-principles: "Separation of concerns".
>
> It is not the job of pop-to-buffer to decide on the buffer-name when to
> split but it is the job of libraries like cus-edit.el to decide this.
>
> Ugly things like that makes it sometimes really hard to develop
> elisp-libraries like ECB.
>
> Ciao,
> Klaus
>
> P.S.
>
> BTW: here is how XEmacs implements custom-create-buffer - IMO the right
> way:
>
> (defun custom-buffer-create (options &optional name description)
> "Create a buffer containing OPTIONS.
> Optional NAME is the name of the buffer.
> OPTIONS should be an alist of the form ((SYMBOL WIDGET)...), where
> SYMBOL is a customization option, and WIDGET is a widget for editing
> that option."
> (unless name (setq name "*Customization*"))
> (kill-buffer (get-buffer-create name))
> (switch-to-buffer (get-buffer-create name))
> (custom-buffer-create-internal options description))
--
Klaus Berndl mailto: klaus.berndl@sdm.de
sd&m AG http://www.sdm.de
software design & management
Carl-Wery-Str. 42, 81739 Muenchen, Germany
Tel +49 89 63812-392, Fax -220