GNU bug report logs - #9577
24.0.50; `find-alternate-file': Redundant confirmation message?

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 9577 in the body.
You can then email your comments to 9577 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: "Drew Adams" <drew.adams <at> oracle.com>
To: <bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org>
Subject: 24.0.50; `find-alternate-file': Redundant confirmation message?
Date: Thu, 22 Sep 2011 08:52:23 -0700

In `files.el' we have this:
 
(when (and (buffer-modified-p) buffer-file-name)
    (if (yes-or-no-p (format "Buffer %s is modified; save it first? "
        (buffer-name)))
        (save-buffer)
      (unless (yes-or-no-p "Kill and replace the buffer without saving it? ")
        (error "Aborted"))))
 
I don't understand why we make the user answer twice that s?he really
wants to abandon the modified buffer.  Surely, if s?he answers `no' to
the first question then the answer to the second is `yes', no?
 
This kind of double-confirmation questioning, especially using a
reversal of the sense of the question (no for the first means the same
as yes for the second) is not only annoying but error prone.
 
Am I missing something?  Is there really a use case for answering no and
then no (beyond changing your mind or not understanding the first
question)?

In GNU Emacs 24.0.50.1 (i386-mingw-nt5.1.2600)
 of 2011-09-19 on 3249CTO
Windowing system distributor `Microsoft Corp.', version 5.1.2600
configured using `configure --with-gcc (4.5) --no-opt'
 

Previous Next

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