GNU bug report logs - #48367
28.0.50; quit-restore-buffer may jam

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 48367 in the body.
You can then email your comments to 48367 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: pillule <pillule <at> riseup.net>
To: bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org
Subject: 28.0.50; quit-restore-buffer may jam
Date: Tue, 11 May 2021 20:26:08 +0000

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

Hello there,

I think there is a small bug with quit-window / 
quit-restore-window :

with emacs -Q

;; set some rules
(setq display-buffer-alist
     '(("\\*\\(Backtrace\\|Messages\\)\\*"
       (display-buffer-in-side-window)
       (window-height . 0.2)
       (side . bottom))))

;; trigger a logical error to display the *Backtrace* buffer
(> vim emacs)

;; display the *Messages* buffer
(view-echo-area-messages)

;; mess the `quit-restore' window parameter
(kill-buffer (get-buffer "*Backtrace*"))

;; which looks now like that in the *Messages* window :
;; ((quit-restore) (window-slot . 0) (window-side . bottom))

;; try to quit the *Messages* window
(progn (select-window (view-echo-area-messages))
      (quit-window))

;; nothing happens :

The first `cond' of quit-restore-window end up to 't,
it calls (switch-to-prev-buffer window bury-or-kill)
but there is no previous-window available.

The first patch adress this, and a similar one : when there is a previous-buffer available, but it referes to the 
same buffer. (eg: try the recipe again but exchange the role of 
*Messages* and *Backtrace*, you will finish with a blank buffer for backtrace, that you can quit again to end up to the same point)

The second patch is a proposition to clarify a little the code.

[quit-restore-window.patch (text/x-diff, attachment)]

[quit-restore-window2.patch (text/x-diff, attachment)]

[Message part 4 (text/plain, inline)]

--

Message #8 received at 48367 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: martin rudalics <rudalics <at> gmx.at>
To: pillule <pillule <at> riseup.net>, 48367 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#48367: 28.0.50; quit-restore-buffer may jam
Date: Wed, 12 May 2021 10:47:55 +0200

> The first patch adress this, and a similar one : when there is a previous-buffer available, but it referes to the same buffer. (eg: try the recipe again but exchange the role of *Messages* and *Backtrace*, you will finish with a blank buffer for backtrace, that you can quit again to end up to the same point)
>
> The second patch is a proposition to clarify a little the code.

LGTM.  Can you please provide a ChangeLog entry and add a short comment
in the code that mentions the bug number of your report.

Also, have you signed the copyright agreement for Emacs?  How should I
call you in the commit?  "pillule"?

And please try to avoid putting your local settings in diffs as with

--- /usr/share/emacs/28.0.50/lisp/window.el.gz
+++ /home/user/src/patches/window.el

Many thanks, martin

Message #11 received at 48367 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: pillule <pillule <at> riseup.net>
To: martin rudalics <rudalics <at> gmx.at>
Cc: pillule <pillule <at> riseup.net>, 48367 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#48367: 28.0.50; quit-restore-window may jam
Date: Wed, 12 May 2021 11:25:51 +0000

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

martin rudalics <rudalics <at> gmx.at> writes:

>> The first patch adress this, and a similar one : when there is 
>> a previous-buffer available, but it referes to the same buffer. 
>> (eg: try the recipe again but exchange the role of *Messages* 
>> and *Backtrace*, you will finish with a blank buffer for 
>> backtrace, that you can quit again to end up to the same point)
>>
>> The second patch is a proposition to clarify a little the code.
>
> LGTM.  Can you please provide a ChangeLog entry and add a short 
> comment
> in the code that mentions the bug number of your report.

Looking at the CONTRIBUTE file, I have done this new version with 
`git format-patch -l1',
Is that overall better ?

[quit-restore-window.patch (text/x-diff, attachment)]

[Message part 3 (text/plain, inline)]

Is that OK to call a cl-lib function in the second patch even if 
this library is not required in window.el ?


> Also, have you signed the copyright agreement for Emacs?  How 
> should I
> call you in the commit?  "pillule"?

No, I have not yet signed the agreement, I contact assign <at> gnu.org 
today to do so. I was hoping sloppily that you consider these 
contributions as trivial.

If it is fine for you to use my pseudonym, it is fine for me.


-- 

Message #14 received at 48367 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: martin rudalics <rudalics <at> gmx.at>
To: pillule <pillule <at> riseup.net>
Cc: 48367 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#48367: 28.0.50; quit-restore-window may jam
Date: Wed, 12 May 2021 14:32:49 +0200

> Looking at the CONTRIBUTE file, I have done this new version with `git format-patch -l1',
> Is that overall better ?

Yes.

> Is that OK to call a cl-lib function in the second patch even if this library is not required in window.el ?

No.  I only re-compiled and did not build.  Please try to avoid it since
otherwise we get a

In end of data:
../../lisp/window.el:5039:29: Warning: the function ‘cl-find-if-not’ is not
    known to be defined.

warning.

>> Also, have you signed the copyright agreement for Emacs?  How should I
>> call you in the commit?  "pillule"?
>
> No, I have not yet signed the agreement, I contact assign <at> gnu.org today to do so. I was hoping sloppily that you consider these contributions as trivial.

They are trivial and we don't need an assignment for them.  But signing
the agreement is always a good idea.

> If it is fine for you to use my pseudonym, it is fine for me.

Then "pillule" be it.

Thanks again, martin

Message #17 received at 48367 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: pillule <pillule <at> riseup.net>
To: martin rudalics <rudalics <at> gmx.at>
Cc: pillule <pillule <at> riseup.net>, 48367 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#48367: 28.0.50; quit-restore-window may jam
Date: Wed, 12 May 2021 14:10:27 +0000

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

martin rudalics <rudalics <at> gmx.at> writes:

>> Is that OK to call a cl-lib function in the second patch even 
>> if this library is not required in window.el ?
>
> No.  I only re-compiled and did not build.  Please try to avoid 
> it since
> otherwise we get a
>
> In end of data:
> ../../lisp/window.el:5039:29: Warning: the function 
> ‘cl-find-if-not’ is not
>     known to be defined.
>
> warning.

Here an alternative version using subr.el instead :

[quit-restore-window.patch (text/x-diff, attachment)]

[Message part 3 (text/plain, inline)]

> They are trivial and we don't need an assignment for them.  But 
> signing
> the agreement is always a good idea.

Ok, it's on its way.

Thank you for the guidance.

-- 

Message #20 received at 48367 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: martin rudalics <rudalics <at> gmx.at>
To: pillule <pillule <at> riseup.net>
Cc: 48367 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#48367: 28.0.50; quit-restore-window may jam
Date: Wed, 12 May 2021 18:40:35 +0200

> Here an alternative version using subr.el instead :

OK.  I trust you that it works as intended.

martin

Message #23 received at 48367 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: martin rudalics <rudalics <at> gmx.at>
To: pillule <pillule <at> riseup.net>
Cc: 48367 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#48367: 28.0.50; quit-restore-window may jam
Date: Sat, 15 May 2021 10:56:02 +0200

> Here an alternative version using subr.el instead :

I've pushed this and the other change now to master in commit
0a681590268a4039f95a5a919b6b6d4f4e880d4c, converting your ChangeLog
exercises to our style.  Please have a look and close this bug if
everything is alright.

Thanks, martin

Message #28 received at 48367-close <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: pillule <pillule <at> riseup.net>
To: 48367-close <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Cc: pillule <pillule <at> riseup.net>, rudalics <at> gmx.at
Subject: Re: bug#48367: 28.0.50; quit-restore-window may jam
Date: Sat, 15 May 2021 10:34:16 +0000

martin rudalics <rudalics <at> gmx.at> writes:

>> Here an alternative version using subr.el instead :
>
> I've pushed this and the other change now to master in commit
> 0a681590268a4039f95a5a919b6b6d4f4e880d4c, converting your 
> ChangeLog
> exercises to our style.  Please have a look and close this bug 
> if
> everything is alright.

Looks fine to me, thanks.

Looking at https://debbugs.gnu.org/Developer.html how to close 
this bug, I hope it worked.

-- 

Previous Next

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