GNU bug report logs - #31648
26; (elisp) `Indirect Buffers': `clone-indirect-buffer'

Previous Next

To add a comment to this bug, you must first unarchive it, by sending
a message to control AT debbugs.gnu.org, with unarchive 31648 in the body.
You can then email your comments to 31648 AT debbugs.gnu.org in the normal way.

Toggle the display of automated, internal messages from the tracker.

Message #5 received at submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Drew Adams <drew.adams <at> oracle.com>
To: bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org
Subject: 26; (elisp) `Indirect Buffers': `clone-indirect-buffer'
Date: Tue, 29 May 2018 15:25:44 -0700 (PDT)

The doc of `clone-indirect-buffer' is incorrect.  It implies that the
new, indirect buffer, is not displayed when the command is invoked
interactively.

The doc string is correct.  Please correct the manual similarly.  The
statement of the second sentence here, from the doc string is missing
from the manual:

 DISPLAY-FLAG non-nil means show the new buffer with 'pop-to-buffer'.
 This is always done when called interactively.
 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

(One might wonder why non-nil, instead of nil, was chosen to show the
buffer, since that's the default interactive behavior - but it's too
late now.)




In GNU Emacs 26.1 (build 1, x86_64-w64-mingw32)
 of 2018-04-10
Repository revision: c267421647510319d2a70554e42f0d1c394dba0a
Windowing system distributor `Microsoft Corp.', version 6.1.7601
Configured using:
 `configure --without-dbus --host=x86_64-w64-mingw32
 --without-compress-install 'CFLAGS=-O2 -static -g3''

Message #10 received at 31648-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
To: Drew Adams <drew.adams <at> oracle.com>
Cc: 31648-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#31648: 26; (elisp) `Indirect Buffers': `clone-indirect-buffer'
Date: Sat, 02 Jun 2018 14:19:07 +0300

> Date: Tue, 29 May 2018 15:25:44 -0700 (PDT)
> From: Drew Adams <drew.adams <at> oracle.com>
> 
> The doc of `clone-indirect-buffer' is incorrect.  It implies that the
> new, indirect buffer, is not displayed when the command is invoked
> interactively.
> 
> The doc string is correct.  Please correct the manual similarly.  The
> statement of the second sentence here, from the doc string is missing
> from the manual:
> 
>  DISPLAY-FLAG non-nil means show the new buffer with 'pop-to-buffer'.
>  This is always done when called interactively.
>  ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

I added a note about DISPLAY-FLAG in interactive calls, but in general
you shouldn't expect this to be spelled out in the ELisp manual,
because interactive invocation of commands is described in the Emacs
manual, and the ELisp manual is biased towards non-interactive uses.

> (One might wonder why non-nil, instead of nil, was chosen to show the
> buffer, since that's the default interactive behavior - but it's too
> late now.)

??? It's the default interactively, but not in non-interactive calls.
It should be clear that non-interactive calls don't necessarily want
to display the cloned buffer.

Previous Next

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