|
From: | Dmitry Gutov |
Subject: | bug#41879: 28.0.50; [Patch]: Add project-switch-to-buffer in project.el |
Date: | Mon, 22 Jun 2020 16:46:03 +0300 |
User-agent: | Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.8.0 |
On 22.06.2020 12:30, Andrii Kolomoiets wrote:
But to keep consistency with switch-to-buffer, project-switch-to-buffer should behave the same.There are other differences, too. The arglist, for example.Well, NORECORD and FORCE-SAME-WINDOW can be passed to switch-to-buffer easily if there is the need to.
Everything can be added later. Adding new function arguments could be a bit more problematic than a slight change in semantics like REQUIRE-MATCH=nil, though.
buffers when existing buffer is required. Because switch-to-buffer is able to create buffers, I can't see the reason why project-switch-to-buffer should require the match.To better protect from typos? It's not a very strong argument, of course. But "just for consistency" isn't one either.How about "To be able to create buffers"? ;) This way there are no need to use switch-to-buffer for those who will use project-switch-to-buffer solely. Imagine project-switch-to-buffer is in your muscle memory. You need to perform additional steps to create the buffer (C-g C-x b type-buffer-name-again) just because the project-switch-to-buffer can't create buffers with no reason.
All right. I'll change it to nil now.Not sure I understand the passion behind your argument, though, since you said you're not going to need this yourself. But perhaps I misunderstood.
[Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread] |