GNU bug report logs - #67249
30.0.50; `same-frame` equivalent for `display-buffer-alist`

Previous Next

Package: emacs;

Reported by: Stefan Monnier <monnier <at> iro.umontreal.ca>

Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2023 21:43:02 UTC

Severity: normal

Found in version 30.0.50

Done: Stefan Monnier <monnier <at> iro.umontreal.ca>

Bug is archived. No further changes may be made.

Full log


Message #89 received at 67249 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Stefan Monnier <monnier <at> iro.umontreal.ca>
To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
Cc: rudalics <at> gmx.at, Drew Adams <drew.adams <at> oracle.com>, 67249 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#67249: 30.0.50; `same-frame` equivalent for
 `display-buffer-alist`
Date: Sun, 10 Dec 2023 11:28:27 -0500
> There's nothing wrong with having parameters and user options by the
> same name that affect the same functionality, but indeed usually the
> user option overrides the parameter, not the other way around.  See,
> for example, the cursor-type option and frame parameter.

Usually the rule we follow is to obey the most specific setting.
In your example, we obey the (potentially buffer-local) variable in
preference to the frame-local parameter.

In my patch the choice is between the global variable (I've never seen
it set buffer-locally and I don't think the code would handle it "right"
if set buffer-locally) and the buffer/operation-specific parameter.

Also, contrary to the current situation where code let-binds the
variable to "impose" its choice over that of the user (which is hard to
undo/override), when code sets it via the new alist entry the user gets
a chance to override this override via `display-buffer-alist`.

The `display-buffer` action system is complex, but it is designed
specifically so as to allow the user to stay in control.


        Stefan





This bug report was last modified 1 year and 215 days ago.

Previous Next


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