GNU bug report logs - #14191
24.3.50; (buffer-list) returns list with non-current buffer as its first element

Previous Next

Full log

Message #22 received at 14191-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: "Drew Adams" <drew.adams <at> oracle.com>
To: "'martin rudalics'" <rudalics <at> gmx.at>
Cc: 'Joost Kremers' <joostkremers <at> fastmail.fm>, 14191-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org,
	'Stefan Monnier' <monnier <at> iro.umontreal.ca>
Subject: RE: bug#14191: 24.3.50;
	(buffer-list) returns list with non-current buffer as its firstelement
Date: Sat, 13 Apr 2013 08:08:36 -0700

> > Why not take away some of the mystery and make the behavior 
> > here more transparent by creating a function whose name
> > suggests it?
> 
> `record-window-buffer' ?

;-)

I wasn't aware of it.  I was just basing my off-the-cuff suggestion on what the
code was apparently trying to do here.

But `record-window-buffer' is apparently quite a bit more than just
(select-window (selected-window)).

Should `record-window-buffer' be used in its place at this occurrence?  If not,
should another function be defined to do only (select-window (selected-window))
- essentially an alias to better communicate the intention?

You're the expert here, not I.  My feeling is just that using (select-window
(selected-window)) to take advantage of a less-than-obvious side effect is
obfuscating, not clever or wise.

Without an informative alias for this action, the code really needs to be
commented to indicate the unobvious intention/effect, at the least.  But is
probably better to have a function name & doc string communicate this than code
comments and bug reports.

Previous Next

GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.