GNU bug report logs - #62621
29.0.60; uniquify can't make buffers unique based on things other than filename

Previous Next

Full log

Message #101 received at 62621 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
To: Spencer Baugh <sbaugh <at> janestreet.com>
Cc: dmitry <at> gutov.dev, 62621 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, sbaugh <at> catern.com
Subject: Re: bug#62621: 29.0.60; uniquify can't make buffers unique based on
 things other than filename
Date: Wed, 19 Jul 2023 16:25:52 +0300

> From: Spencer Baugh <sbaugh <at> janestreet.com>
> Cc: Dmitry Gutov <dmitry <at> gutov.dev>,  sbaugh <at> catern.com,  62621 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
> Date: Wed, 19 Jul 2023 08:31:00 -0400
> 
> >> >>> Repeat after me: Use options whose values are functions
> >> >>> are hard on our users, because they require them to be Lisp
> >> >>> programmers.
> >> >> That doesn't have to be the case. If the defcustom's docstring mentions
> >> >> several functions that can be used, and the :type widget includes them
> >> >> as well, the user can decide to switch to any of them without writing
> >> >> any Lisp (or having to understand the implementations).
> >> > But that was not so in this particular case.
> >> 
> >> That's easy to fix, as long as you don't have additional objections to 
> >> that approach.
> >
> > I'd need to see the fix first, because I don't think I have a clear
> > idea of what you have in mind.
> >
> > (My objections, btw, where very minor and of pure usability nature.
> > Frankly, I'm surprised such a simple and more-or-less agreed-upon
> > comment got such a long thread of discussing various loosely-related
> > issues.)
> 
> Like this:

Thanks, but it still falls short of what Dmitry described above: the
doc string doesn't "mention several functions that can be used".

> +(defcustom uniquify-dirname-transform #'identity
> +  "Function to transform buffer's directory for uniquifying its name.
> +
> +It takes a single argument: the directory of the buffer.  It
> +should return a string filename (which does not need to actually
> +exist in the filesystem) to use for uniquifying the buffer name."

Please read this carefully and try to put yourself in the shoes of a
user who needs to make sense out of this description.  The immediate
question I had is what does "transforming a buffer's directory" have
to do with "uniquifying the buffer name"?  Uniquifying a buffer's name
is not about its directory, at least not in general.  IOW, the
starting point of this description is too "inside" the implementation.

Previous Next

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