Subject: Re: bug#59502: 29.0.50; [PATCH] Dedicated buffers per project

From: Kévin Le Gouguec <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 25 Nov 2022 09:14:17 +0100

Dmitry Gutov <[email-masked]> writes:

> For the rest, this probably makes sense. I do wish we had an "upvote"
> button on these threads, to see how many people are interested in
> this.
>
> Anyone would like to +1?

👍

I'd say solution 3) is the one I'm most attracted to.

Idly wondering if it'd make sense to also pass the major-mode to
project-buffer-name-function, since string matching might be unreliable
in some situations?  Can't think of any concrete problem off the top of
my head, I just have a vague expectation that mode symbols might be more
stable than buffer names.  It's unsubstantiated though, so feel free to
dismiss.

FWIW I think the "serving suggestion" from the OP…

> (setopt project-buffer-name-function
>         (lambda (name)
>             (format "*%s-%s*"
>                     (project-name (project-current))
>                     name)))

… would make sense as a defcustom alternative (and could then be re-used
by project-buffer-name-default).

Thanks Gabriel!