GNU bug report logs - #75828
[PATCH] Correct make-frame docstring vis-a-vis make_frame.c

Previous Next

Full log

Message #77 received at 75828 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
To: martin rudalics <rudalics <at> gmx.at>
Cc: 75828 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, shipmints <at> gmail.com, stefankangas <at> gmail.com
Subject: Re: bug#75828: [PATCH] Correct make-frame docstring vis-a-vis
 make_frame.c
Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2025 15:54:50 +0200

> Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2025 12:00:42 +0100
> Cc: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>, stefankangas <at> gmail.com,
>  75828 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
> From: martin rudalics <rudalics <at> gmx.at>
> 
> +By default this function does not display the current buffer in the new
> +frame if the buffer is hidden, that is, if its name starts with a space.
> +However, if the variable @code{expose-hidden-buffer} is either @code{t}
> +or equals the symbol @code{make-frame}, it will display the current
> +buffer even if it is hidden.

This text should IMO say that the function will display another buffer
instead of a hidden one.  The wording above could be interpreted as
meaning it will display nothing at all.

> +By default do not display the current buffer in the new frame if the
> +buffer is hidden, that is, if the buffer's name starts with a space.
> +However, if `expose-hidden-buffer' is either t or equals the symbol
> +`make-frame', display the current buffer even if it is hidden."

Same here.

I also wonder why the value t alone is not enough.  It might be
confusing to have a symbol whose name is the same as the name of a
function, so if we can do with t alone, I'd prefer that.

Thanks.

Previous Next

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