Subject: Re: bug#69983: Use category for display-buffer-alist

From: Eli Zaretskii <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 12 Apr 2024 21:27:04 +0300

> From: Juri Linkov <[email-masked]>
> Cc: [email-masked],  [email-masked]
> Date: Fri, 12 Apr 2024 19:50:55 +0300
> 
> >> Adding hundreds of separate options for every display-buffer call
> >> makes no sense.
> >
> > Adding hundreds of separate options indeed doesn't make sense, but I
> > suggested to add just one.
> 
> The point of this bug report is to remove options, not to add a new ones.

If we want to enable user control of displaying warnings, we will have
to add an option for that, because currently that cannot be
controlled.  display-buffer-alist is inappropriate for such control,
since in some cases warnings are not displayed in pop-up windows.

> > In addition:
> >
> >   . you haven't addressed my comments that currently we don't even
> >     document that warnings.el uses display-buffer (and neither do I
> >     think we _should_ document that);
> 
> I agree, this should be documented.  Then problem solved.

That's not TRT, because in some cases warnings are not displayed via
display-buffer.  So documenting this would produce inaccurate
documentation.

> >   . you haven't explained what kind of behavior change would you like
> >     to make in how warnings.el displays the warnings, without which
> >     I'm not even sure I understand the intended change of behavior
> 
> The problem of the users of horizontally split windows
> is that the warning buffer pops up in unpredictable places,
> thus disrupting the user's window layout.
> 
> The proposed change is to always display the warning buffer at the bottom
> where most contemporary IDEs are displaying such information.

Thanks, but what do you mean by "at the bottom"?  Can you describe
that place more precisely?