|
From: | Dmitry Gutov |
Subject: | bug#40919: 27.0.91; next-error-select-buffer does not always behave as documented |
Date: | Sun, 14 Jun 2020 14:50:33 +0300 |
User-agent: | Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.8.0 |
On 12.06.2020 01:43, Juri Linkov wrote:
what kind of functions do they want to put on there?Both next-error-buffer-on-selected-frame and next-error-no-navigation-try-current.And/or would they be content to advice-add on next-error-find-buffer-function instead?Is it possible to add advice-add by using customization?
No, or at least not yet. But if we know of only one user that wants this setup, surely that's not a problem?
By the way, you were going to evaluate the new default. Do you now think that it's problematic somehow (and, for instance, the previous was a better default), or do you want to change it as a purely personal preference?
-(defcustom next-error-find-buffer-function #'ignore +(defcustom next-error-find-buffer-function '(ignore)^s, maybe?Ok, when using as a hook it could be '-functions', but in case of using advice-add it should be still '-function'.
Yup. These are the two options.
;; 2. If next-error-last-buffer is an acceptable buffer, use that. (if (and next-error-last-buffer (next-error-buffer-p next-error-last-buffer avoid-currentShould we take the rest of the cases in next-error-find-buffer and move them to the default value of the above hook?I don't think so, I don't believe someone might want to customize the rest of the cases.
Well, if you're sure about that.Having them all on the hook seemed logical to me, but indeed I don't know how necessary that is.
[Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread] |