GNU bug report logs - #49980
28.0.50; [PATCH] Should we have project-save-buffers?

Previous Next

Full log

View this message in rfc822 format

From: Dmitry Gutov <dgutov <at> yandex.ru>
To: Juri Linkov <juri <at> linkov.net>
Cc: Giap Tran <txgvnn <at> gmail.com>, 49980 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: bug#49980: 28.0.50; [PATCH] Should we have project-save-buffers?
Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2021 05:06:17 +0300

On 12.08.2021 10:55, Juri Linkov wrote:
>>> It would be nice to have a keybinding for this useful command,
>>> as there is 'C-x s', but 'C-x p s' is bound to 'project-shell'.
>>> Maybe then to bind it to 'C-x p S'?
>>
>> If we do end up adding this command, we could move project-shell to 'C-x
>> p E', for example, so that we don't spread shell-related commands over
>> different letters.
> 
> Or to a new prefix map, e.g. 'C-x p x s' with mnemonics "eXecute Shell".

That would also displace project-execute-extended-command, which seems 
gratuitous. And if we were putting different commands together to save 
keymap space, 'project-compile' seems closer in purpose to 
'project-shell' than 'project-execute-extended-command'.

Anyway, 'e' as a mnemonic for 'Eshell' or 'shEll' seems good enough for me.

>> But see my question in the other email.
>> Is there any reason not to just use 'save-some-buffers' (C-x s)?
> 
> In bug#46374 we are adding a new option 'project-root'
> to 'save-some-buffers-default-predicate' that will allow
> 'C-x s' to save only files under the same project root.

That also seems to indicate that we don't need a separate command.

Previous Next

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