GNU bug report logs - #74361
[PATCH] New option xref-navigation-display-window-action

Previous Next

Full log

View this message in rfc822 format

From: Dmitry Gutov <dmitry <at> gutov.dev>
To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>, martin rudalics <rudalics <at> gmx.at>
Cc: 74361 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, juri <at> linkov.net
Subject: bug#74361: [PATCH] New option xref-navigation-display-window-action
Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2024 21:10:25 +0200

Hi Eli,

On 15/11/2024 14:13, Eli Zaretskii wrote:

> I added Martin to the discussion, and have a few minor comments below.

Thanks.

>> +(defcustom xref-navigation-display-window-action nil
>> +  "When non-nil, the display action to use for navigation commands.
> 
> This is too general, when taken alone (as in the apropos commands).  I
> suggest something like
> 
>    If non-nil, the `display-buffer' action for showing results of Xref commands.
> 
> (The "navigation" part seems misleading, since xref-find-definitions
> is not a navigation command.)

That's the term I would use both both, but maybe there could be better 
wording. If xref-find-definition is not a navigation command, is it a 
"search command"?

>> +This does not affect commands that specify the action explicitly,
> 
> I guess "...that specify the window to use explicitly" is more
> accurate?

Or frame. We basically have two built-in commands like that: one 
specifies the window (kind of -- only that the "other" window should be 
used, but not a specific window), and another for "other frame".

>> +such as `xref-find-definitions-other-window'."
>> +  :type '(choice (const :tag "Use selected window" nil)
>> +                 (const :tag "Reuse window showing destination or use another"
> 
> I think "If possible, reuse window already showing destination" is
> better?

This is better, thanks.

>> +(defun xref--switch-to-buffer (buf)
>> +  (if xref-navigation-display-window-action
>> +      (pop-to-buffer buf xref-navigation-display-window-action)
> 
> Should we have some sanity checks for the value of
> xref-navigation-display-window-action?  It's a user option, so
> theoretically the user could use setq to set it to any value.

I think whatever sanity checks 'display-buffer' has for the ACTION 
argument would be used anyway. Also this might be moot given the 
"category" suggestion.

Previous Next

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