|
From: | Jim Porter |
Subject: | bug#51993: 29.0.50; [PATCH] Killing emacsclient terminal with `server-stop-automatically' doesn't prompt to save files |
Date: | Tue, 23 Nov 2021 14:08:05 -0800 |
On 11/23/2021 12:37 PM, Gregory Heytings wrote:
This is not a bug, this is the intented behavior of that featureI started that discussion (and participated throughout it), and I don't think we actually agreed that this was the intended behavior.This is the behavior I intended (and described in the docstring and manual), if you prefer. And you did not make further comments in bug#51377, which can be interpreted as a kind of agreement.
Unfortunately, I was sidetracked by other things and didn't have a chance to comment before Lars merged the patch. Since it had already been merged, I thought it best to follow up in a separate bug once I had made concise steps to reproduce the issue and a patch to fix it.
I should stress that the case I brought up above is just a counterexample to show a problem with a previous implementation strategyWhich problem?
Prior to that comment, your proposed implementation would kill Emacs on a timer when there were no non-daemon frames left, which could result in unsaved changes to files being lost. I replied to point that out and showed some steps to reproduce it: <https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-gnu-emacs/2021-10/msg02163.html>.
The current behavior on Emacs 29 certainly isn't what I personally intended when bringing the idea up on emacs-devel.Is the current behavior of Emacs 29 with my patch and (server-stop-automatically 'kill-terminal) still not what you want? If not, what is missing?
If I'm understanding your patch, the behavior I'm looking for is essentially a combination of `kill-terminal' and `delete-last-frame'. I may be misunderstanding it though, since the call tree in your patch confuses me a bit: with `kill-terminal', `server-save-buffers-kill-terminal` calls `server-stop-automatically--handle-delete-frame', which then calls `server-save-buffers-kill-terminal' again.
One of my other goals in my patch was to simplify the logic in `server-save-buffers-kill-terminal' and `server-stop-automatically--handle-delete-frame' somewhat. Rather than to have `server-stop-automatically--handle-delete-frame' check if it was called by `save-buffers-kill-terminal', I found that the implementation was simpler (to me, anyway) if that logic was lifted up into `server-save-buffers-kill-terminal'.
One benefit of this simplification is that it causes fewer changes in behavior compared to not using `server-stop-automatically'. For example, normally when a user kills an emacsclient terminal, Emacs will prompt about saving files *before* deleting any frames. This is nice because it allows the user to back out by pressing C-g, leaving Emacs in (almost) the same state it was previously. My patch handles that and allows the user to press C-g and leave all the current frames open.
With your patch in this bug, using `kill-terminal' and pressing C-x C-c will close all frames for the current client but the current one, and only then prompt the user to save buffers. Thus, pressing C-g will leave the user with only that last client frame still open.
(Note: to test this behavior, you probably need multiple clients open as I outlined in the first post to this bug.)
I'm concerned that we're now up to 4 different behaviors, when I think two of them are just the result of a miscommunication between the two of us.They are not, AFAICS. The four behaviors are four reasonable options, each of which can (and is) described in a short paragraph, and corresponds to a different user preference. I see no reason to remove any of the current three behaviors because of an unspecified "problem". Especially given that all these behaviors are implemented in only ~50 lines of Lisp.
I've specified the problems. I can try to clarify if there's any confusion though. This bug is one such problem.
I don't think that a user who opts in to stopping the Emacs daemon automatically is *also* opting in to changing the behavior of whether Emacs will prompt about saving files when killing a (non-last) client. Since there are other clients, the daemon won't be killed, and so the behavior should be identical to what happens without `server-stop-automatically'. As a user, I would find it very strange that enabling `server-stop-automatically' would change Emacs' behavior in ways *other than* stopping the server in certain cases.
Of course, a user may indeed want to be able to kill a client (but not the daemon) without being prompted to save files, but I think that's independent of whether the daemon should be stopped when the last client exits. If users *do* want this behavior, we could add a totally separate option for it; this would allow users who don't want to be prompted but also don't want `server-stop-automatically' to use it.
[Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread] |