Re: window-next-buffers

[Chong Yidong]

Juri Linkov <address@hidden> writes:

>> No, I was wrong: a ring isn't a good fit for the design, in which
>> `switch-to-prev-buffer' (i) switches to the previous buffers displayed
>> in the buffer, and (ii) after successive `switch-to-prev-buffer's reach
>> the end of that list, the command moves on to other buffers in the
>> buffer list which the window hadn't visited before.  If we used a ring,
>> we'd never hit the end, so we'd never move on to (ii).
>
> Then we need just one list of buffers (visited in the window)
> and the pointer referencing the currently displayed buffer
> (or a numeric index of the position of the currently displayed
> buffer in the list of visited buffers).

Yes, that would be far simpler.