GNU bug report logs - #9532
24.0.50; `special-display-regexps' is no longer respected

Previous Next

Package: emacs;

Reported by: "Drew Adams" <drew.adams <at> oracle.com>

Date: Sat, 17 Sep 2011 15:01:01 UTC

Severity: normal

Found in version 24.0.50

Done: Stefan Monnier <monnier <at> IRO.UMontreal.CA>

Bug is archived. No further changes may be made.

Full log


View this message in rfc822 format

From: "Drew Adams" <drew.adams <at> oracle.com>
To: "'Chong Yidong'" <cyd <at> stupidchicken.com>
Cc: 9532 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: bug#9532: 24.0.50; `special-display-regexps' is no longer respected
Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2011 11:51:19 -0700
Good news, for me at least: This bug seems to be fixed in Emacs 24 pretest #1:

In GNU Emacs 24.0.90.1 (i386-mingw-nt5.1.2600)
 of 2011-10-18 on MARVIN
Windowing system distributor `Microsoft Corp.', version 5.1.2600
configured using `configure --with-gcc (4.6) --no-opt --cflags -I"C:/Program
Files (x86)/GnuWin32/include" -ID:/devel/emacs/libXpm-3.5.8/include
-ID:/devel/emacs/libXpm-3.5.8/src -ID:/devel/emacs/gnutls-2.10.5-x86/include
--ldflags -LD:/devel/emacs/gnutls-2.10.5-x86/lib'

(I had to remove my modified version of Martin's `pop-to-buffer-same-window',
and then it worked.)

Question: I'm still doing the following, which was needed in prior releases, but
it apparently has no effect now.  I say that because `same-window-regexps' is in
fact nil, regardless of whether I do this.

(cond ((> emacs-major-version 21)
       (remove-hook 'same-window-regexps "\\*info\\*\\(\\|<[0-9]+>\\)")
       (remove-hook 'same-window-regexps "\\`\\*Customiz.*\\*\\'"))
      ((< emacs-major-version 21)
       (remove-hook 'same-window-buffer-names "*info*"))
      (t
       (remove-hook 'same-window-buffer-names "*info*")
       (remove-hook 'same-window-regexps "\\`\\*Customiz.*\\*\\'")))

(a) Can you confirm that it should have no effect?
(b) How does/should a user now control these things?

Is it the case, perhaps, that things are just as before wrt
`same-window-regexps', except that now its default value is nil instead of
pre-populated?  Would it be appropriate/effective to use, say, `add-hook' to add
a pattern to it?  (Yes, I know and agree that customizing it is no doubt
preferable, for individual users.)  Thx.








This bug report was last modified 13 years and 261 days ago.

Previous Next


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