[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: xref and leaving "temporary" buffers open

From: Eli Zaretskii
Subject: Re: xref and leaving "temporary" buffers open
Date: Sat, 25 Jul 2015 17:36:28 +0300

> Cc: address@hidden
> From: Dmitry Gutov <address@hidden>
> Date: Sat, 25 Jul 2015 17:24:58 +0300
> On 07/25/2015 05:07 PM, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> >> The question is, should they be killed afterwards.
> >
> > There are arguments either way, AFAIU, so perhaps make this a
> > defcustom.
> That's a cop-out answer.

Is it ever possible to have a discussion with you without feeling
castigated for my views and opinions?  You asked for opinions, so
please accept them benevolently, even if you don't like them.

> Whichever value is the default, will influence the implementation
> (if the buffers are killed right away, they should be opened in a
> special way, otherwise, they must be opened normally, with all
> applicable minor modes).

My vote is for the default that keeps the buffers.  I see nothing
wrong with having a lot of buffers in an Emacs session.  Personally, I
regularly walk through all my buffers and kill those I no longer need,
because I use desktop.el to restore my sessions, which would otherwise
grow indefinitely.  It's no big deal.  It is much less of a big deal
if sessions are not restored.

> If the buffers are killed, xref-query-replace will need to account for 
> that, and not open too many buffers at the same time.

I don't see why that would be true.  Please elaborate.

> > Might be reasonable.  Again, if you are in doubt, let a user option
> > override that.
> Please, let's stop with "implement every behavior a user might want". 
> There are better things for a developer to spend time on. Unless a 
> particular behavior is requested, a user option is premature.

You asked for an opinion, that's mine.  IME, good engineering
anticipates such requests before they are voiced.  If you can only
resolve a controversy applying your personal preferences, it's a clear
sign that someone, somewhere will be unhappy about it.

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]