[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: blast, overwrote another forgotten *compilation* buffer
From: |
Kevin Rodgers |
Subject: |
Re: blast, overwrote another forgotten *compilation* buffer |
Date: |
Thu, 27 Dec 2001 15:25:17 -0700 |
Dan Jacobson wrote:
>
> Gentlemen, I have thought up a bad "shituation": You start one of
> those 3 hour M-x compile jobs. You go to the disco and come back and
> it's 5 hours later and you forgot and you do some other puny M-x
> compile job, which overwrites all that hard-earned info in the
> *compilation* buffer. It's like drat^2.
I hope the Emacs maintainers don't spend any effort to implement your
suggested solutions to a hypothetical problem that (1) you haven't actually
experienced and (2) haven't tried to solve via the features already provided
(e.g. customizing compilation-buffer-name-function).
> OK, 1. yes I could have redirected the output, renamed the buffer,
> etc. etc. but the point is __I didn't think I would forget when I
> started__
>
> 2. in Help we notice
> The name used for the buffer is actually whatever is returned by
> the function in `compilation-buffer-name-function', so you can set
> that
> to a function that generates a unique name.
>
> This sounds like a way to avoid the problem...
>
> Hmmm... I know: make unique *compilation* buffers one per
> directory.... one probably wouldn't have 2 makefiles in the same
> directory... [at least simple me]. Also, a simple "M-x compile
> date" would be enough to wipe it out if done in the same current
> directory.
>
> OK, fellas, so, need a child-guard cap so as not to overwrite
> forgotten *compilation* buffers.
>
> Another method would be to ask in cases when the last *compilation*
> buffer hasn't been looked at yet and we want to start a new
> compilation... but maybe I did indeed look at it but something else
> came up and i switched buffers and forgot about it.
>
> Another method is to make unique names for each compilation, perhaps
> with the time and directory in them, via
> compilation-buffer-name-function ... but that might leave emacs
> cluttered with useless buffers... hmm, but I don't feel that bad about
> all those *sent mail* buffers...
>
> [Mom says I'm management material because I always report top
> [surface] level bugs whilst never getting my hands dirty with actual
> coding :-)]
>
> By the way, there also then is the problem of the default compile
> command prompting with the last compile command done by
> default... perhaps this history should be separate for separate
> compile commands run in different directories.
>
> And then what of course if emacs dies, are *compilation* buffers worth
> doing autosaves by default... probably not, as you've got bigger
> problems to deal with. However, in normal circumstances perhaps we
> still can have one of those futuristic voices appear, upon exit-emacs
> "Sir, you have a *compilation* buffer that you may not have looked at
> yet, do you really want to exit emacs?" ... [you know like the HAL
> 2001 movie computer voice]
> --
> http://www.geocities.com/jidanni/ Tel+886-4-25854780
--
Kevin Rodgers <kevinr@ihs.com>