Re: Friendlier dired experience [CODE INCLUDED]

[Boruch Baum]

On 2020-11-06 08:28, Drew Adams wrote:
> > So, I suppose a way to 'hijack' the bookmark process would be to
> > advise around function bookmark-default-handler checking for the
> > current buffer's major-mode, the state of variable diredc-mode and
> > whether the bookmark is a directory. The ugly part of the 'hijack'
> > is keeping the code of the advice in sync with the underlying
> > function.
>
> Are you looking for a way to have your own bookmark-handling code do
> what you want with a vanilla bookmark for a directory? Is that it?

Don't pin this on me, Drew. I was just responding to Stefan Monnier's
proposal.

> Why not instead define your own bookmark handler for directory
> bookmarks? That's what bookmark handlers are for.

Because a specific bookmark's handler is hard-coded into the
data-structure when added, so which ever function creates the bookmark,
be it ye olde function bookmark-set or the new kid diredc, that's the
function that defines the handler to be used.

> FWIW -
>
> In Bookmark+ Dired buffers have their own bookmark handler.

That's very sensible and should be what function bookmark-set does
instead of what it does now which is run through a set of conditionals.

> Bookmarking a Dired buffer records not just the directory location
> but also its `ls' switches, which files are marked, which subdirs are
> inserted, and which (sub)dirs are hidden. Jumping to a Dired bookmark
> restores all of that.

That's why I never end up actually ever using your extensions, Drew. I
think they're great and I enjoy reading them, but it always ends up
intimidating me with a sense of overkill.

--
hkp://keys.gnupg.net
CA45 09B5 5351 7C11 A9D1  7286 0036 9E45 1595 8BC0