GNU bug report logs - #74773
[PATCH] Elaborate doc string for rcirc-next-active-buffer

Previous Next

To add a comment to this bug, you must first unarchive it, by sending
a message to control AT debbugs.gnu.org, with unarchive 74773 in the body.
You can then email your comments to 74773 AT debbugs.gnu.org in the normal way.

Toggle the display of automated, internal messages from the tracker.

Message #5 received at submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Scott Bell <sctb <at> me.com>
To: bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org
Subject: [PATCH] Elaborate doc string for rcirc-next-active-buffer
Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2024 12:20:04 -0700

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

I found the current behavior of rcirc-next-active-buffer surprising in
the case where there is no activity, so I thought it could be described
in the doc string.

[0001-lisp-net-rcirc.el-rcirc-next-active-buffer-Doc-strin.patch (text/x-patch, attachment)]

Message #8 received at 74773 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
To: Scott Bell <sctb <at> me.com>,
 Leo Liu <sdl.web <at> gmail.com>, Philip Kaludercic <philipk <at> posteo.net>
Cc: 74773 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#74773: [PATCH] Elaborate doc string for
 rcirc-next-active-buffer
Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2024 14:21:10 +0200

> Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2024 12:20:04 -0700
> From:  Scott Bell via "Bug reports for GNU Emacs,
>  the Swiss army knife of text editors" <bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org>
> 
> I found the current behavior of rcirc-next-active-buffer surprising in
> the case where there is no activity, so I thought it could be described
> in the doc string.

Leo and Philip, is this okay to install?

> >From b5a3f93c006316d53139bbd308afbf4c70c89289 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Scott Bell <sctb <at> me.com>
> Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2024 12:02:54 -0700
> Subject: [PATCH] ; * lisp/net/rcirc.el (rcirc-next-active-buffer): Doc string
> 
> ---
>  lisp/net/rcirc.el | 3 ++-
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/lisp/net/rcirc.el b/lisp/net/rcirc.el
> index c41e2ec153f..33e4008fc0b 100644
> --- a/lisp/net/rcirc.el
> +++ b/lisp/net/rcirc.el
> @@ -2448,7 +2448,8 @@ rcirc-bury-buffers
>  
>  (defun rcirc-next-active-buffer (arg)
>    "Switch to the next rcirc buffer with activity.
> -With prefix ARG, go to the next low priority buffer with activity."
> +With prefix ARG, go to the next low priority buffer with activity.
> +When there are no buffers with activity, bury all rcirc buffers."
>    (interactive "P")
>    (let* ((pair (rcirc-split-activity rcirc-activity))
>           (lopri (car pair))
> -- 
> 2.39.5 (Apple Git-154)
> 

Message #11 received at 74773 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Leo Liu <sdl.web <at> gmail.com>
To: Zaretskii Eli <eliz <at> gnu.org>
Cc: Bell Scott <sctb <at> me.com>, Kaludercic Philip <philipk <at> posteo.net>,
 74773 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#74773: [PATCH] Elaborate doc string for
 rcirc-next-active-buffer
Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2024 21:37:25 +0800

> On 11 Dec 2024, at 20:21, Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org> wrote:
> 
> 
>> 
>> Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2024 12:20:04 -0700
>> From:  Scott Bell via "Bug reports for GNU Emacs,
>> the Swiss army knife of text editors" <bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org>
>> 
>> I found the current behavior of rcirc-next-active-buffer surprising in
>> the case where there is no activity, so I thought it could be described
>> in the doc string.
> 
> Leo and Philip, is this okay to install?

After checking all irc buffers with activity, the next rcirc-next-active-buffer returns you back to the buffer where your work is ie non irc buffers.

So the patch doesn’t add much though harmless.

— Leo

> 
>>> From b5a3f93c006316d53139bbd308afbf4c70c89289 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
>> From: Scott Bell <sctb <at> me.com>
>> Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2024 12:02:54 -0700
>> Subject: [PATCH] ; * lisp/net/rcirc.el (rcirc-next-active-buffer): Doc string
>> 
>> ---
>> lisp/net/rcirc.el | 3 ++-
>> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>> 
>> diff --git a/lisp/net/rcirc.el b/lisp/net/rcirc.el
>> index c41e2ec153f..33e4008fc0b 100644
>> --- a/lisp/net/rcirc.el
>> +++ b/lisp/net/rcirc.el
>> @@ -2448,7 +2448,8 @@ rcirc-bury-buffers
>> 
>> (defun rcirc-next-active-buffer (arg)
>>   "Switch to the next rcirc buffer with activity.
>> -With prefix ARG, go to the next low priority buffer with activity."
>> +With prefix ARG, go to the next low priority buffer with activity.
>> +When there are no buffers with activity, bury all rcirc buffers."
>>   (interactive "P")
>>   (let* ((pair (rcirc-split-activity rcirc-activity))
>>          (lopri (car pair))
>> --
>> 2.39.5 (Apple Git-154)
>> 

Message #14 received at 74773 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Philip Kaludercic <philipk <at> posteo.net>
To: Leo Liu <sdl.web <at> gmail.com>
Cc: Bell Scott <sctb <at> me.com>, Zaretskii Eli <eliz <at> gnu.org>,
 74773 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#74773: [PATCH] Elaborate doc string for
 rcirc-next-active-buffer
Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2024 16:31:56 +0000

Leo Liu <sdl.web <at> gmail.com> writes:

>> On 11 Dec 2024, at 20:21, Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org> wrote:
>> 
>> 
>>> 
>>> Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2024 12:20:04 -0700
>>> From:  Scott Bell via "Bug reports for GNU Emacs,
>>> the Swiss army knife of text editors" <bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org>
>>> 
>>> I found the current behavior of rcirc-next-active-buffer surprising in
>>> the case where there is no activity, so I thought it could be described
>>> in the doc string.
>> 
>> Leo and Philip, is this okay to install?
>
> After checking all irc buffers with activity, the next rcirc-next-active-buffer returns you back to the buffer where your work is ie non irc buffers.
>
> So the patch doesn’t add much though harmless.

1+

> — Leo
>
>> 
>>>> From b5a3f93c006316d53139bbd308afbf4c70c89289 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
>>> From: Scott Bell <sctb <at> me.com>
>>> Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2024 12:02:54 -0700
>>> Subject: [PATCH] ; * lisp/net/rcirc.el (rcirc-next-active-buffer): Doc string
>>> 
>>> ---
>>> lisp/net/rcirc.el | 3 ++-
>>> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>> 
>>> diff --git a/lisp/net/rcirc.el b/lisp/net/rcirc.el
>>> index c41e2ec153f..33e4008fc0b 100644
>>> --- a/lisp/net/rcirc.el
>>> +++ b/lisp/net/rcirc.el
>>> @@ -2448,7 +2448,8 @@ rcirc-bury-buffers
>>> 
>>> (defun rcirc-next-active-buffer (arg)
>>>   "Switch to the next rcirc buffer with activity.
>>> -With prefix ARG, go to the next low priority buffer with activity."
>>> +With prefix ARG, go to the next low priority buffer with activity.
>>> +When there are no buffers with activity, bury all rcirc buffers."
>>>   (interactive "P")
>>>   (let* ((pair (rcirc-split-activity rcirc-activity))
>>>          (lopri (car pair))
>>> --
>>> 2.39.5 (Apple Git-154)
>>> 

Message #19 received at 74773-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
To: Philip Kaludercic <philipk <at> posteo.net>
Cc: sctb <at> me.com, sdl.web <at> gmail.com, 74773-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#74773: [PATCH] Elaborate doc string for
 rcirc-next-active-buffer
Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2024 13:19:49 +0200

> From: Philip Kaludercic <philipk <at> posteo.net>
> Cc: Zaretskii Eli <eliz <at> gnu.org>,  Bell Scott <sctb <at> me.com>,
>   74773 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
> Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2024 16:31:56 +0000
> 
> Leo Liu <sdl.web <at> gmail.com> writes:
> 
> >> On 11 Dec 2024, at 20:21, Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org> wrote:
> >> 
> >> 
> >>> 
> >>> Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2024 12:20:04 -0700
> >>> From:  Scott Bell via "Bug reports for GNU Emacs,
> >>> the Swiss army knife of text editors" <bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org>
> >>> 
> >>> I found the current behavior of rcirc-next-active-buffer surprising in
> >>> the case where there is no activity, so I thought it could be described
> >>> in the doc string.
> >> 
> >> Leo and Philip, is this okay to install?
> >
> > After checking all irc buffers with activity, the next rcirc-next-active-buffer returns you back to the buffer where your work is ie non irc buffers.
> >
> > So the patch doesn’t add much though harmless.
> 
> 1+

Thanks, so I've now installed this on the emacs-30 branch, and I'm
closing this bug.

Previous Next

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