[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Scratch buffer annoyance
From: |
Richard Stallman |
Subject: |
Re: Scratch buffer annoyance |
Date: |
Wed, 08 Aug 2007 20:07:34 -0400 |
On second thought, I think that it can be wrapped into
auto-mode-alist. If someone does C-x b unnamed.c RET, chances are
that he won't find it strange to see the buffer in C mode rather than
fundamental mode. And the only buffers that are not file-related tend
to start with *.
You might be right, but the change seems too radical to me.
I would rather introduce a new buffer-auto-mode-alist
just to avoid the incompatible change.
- Re: Scratch buffer annoyance, (continued)
- Re: Scratch buffer annoyance, Juri Linkov, 2007/08/05
- Re: Scratch buffer annoyance, Richard Stallman, 2007/08/06
- Re: Scratch buffer annoyance, David Kastrup, 2007/08/06
- Re: Scratch buffer annoyance, Richard Stallman, 2007/08/06
- Re: Scratch buffer annoyance, David Kastrup, 2007/08/07
- Re: Scratch buffer annoyance, Richard Stallman, 2007/08/07
- Re: Scratch buffer annoyance, David Kastrup, 2007/08/07
- Re: Scratch buffer annoyance,
Richard Stallman <=
- Re: Scratch buffer annoyance, Juri Linkov, 2007/08/09
- Re: Scratch buffer annoyance, Andreas Schwab, 2007/08/09
- Re: Scratch buffer annoyance, Richard Stallman, 2007/08/11
- buffer-auto-mode-alist (was: Scratch buffer annoyance), Juri Linkov, 2007/08/19
- Re: buffer-auto-mode-alist (was: Scratch buffer annoyance), Richard Stallman, 2007/08/20
- Re: Scratch buffer annoyance, Juri Linkov, 2007/08/08
- Re: Scratch buffer annoyance, David Kastrup, 2007/08/08
- Re: Scratch buffer annoyance, Juri Linkov, 2007/08/09
- Re: Scratch buffer annoyance, David Kastrup, 2007/08/09
- Re: Scratch buffer annoyance, Richard Stallman, 2007/08/11