Re: Patch proposal: display symbol source code in help buffers

[martin rudalics]

>> Help-buffer windows are as a rule displayed via 'display-buffer' and are
>> easily recognizable because their buffer is always called *Help*.  So
>> you can simply add a 'window-height' action alist entry for them which
>> is considerably more versatile than what you propose above.
>
> Yes, I know; but think of new users comming from other editors and 
applications,
> having no experience with Lisp and never heard of conses and alists.

Such users likely do not run 'temp-buffer-resize-mode' either.

> I use display-buffer-alist to achieve something with *Help* buffer (and some
> others) myself. I posted that snippet in the other thread I don't know if all
> that stuff  existed back in time when original poster posted his bug repport
> (2011), but at least nowadays, the bug should be marked as resolved, since it 
is
> possible to tell Emacs to reuse Help buffer and window, instead of opening new
> ones.

I got lost.  Which bug report is that?

> However, I don't think my solution to that problem, same as you suggest here,
> is very convenient to new users. People are used to see some option they can
> toggle on/off, some slider they can pull left right, some value they can pull
> from a list or enter into some box. I think it is more helpful to see some
> variable with clear and descriptive name, I think new users would appreciate
> that. But that is just my opinion.

The solution I suggested is for users who know well what they want.  New
users should be content with the default and, after experimenting with
it for some time, 'temp-buffer-resize-mode'.  BTW, most Emacs developers
use the default, I presume.

> Anyway, I have read both threads you have refered too. One of them, the
> Florians, (Bug#9054), is completely unrelated to what this patch does. Well it
> is about help buffer, but there you are concerned with wath happens *before* 
user
> enters the help buffer and in which way user will come to that buffer.
>
>>         Where to pop up the location of the source and how to get rid of
>> it is a question we currently discuss in Bug#9054
>
> And that is exactly what I say above; this patch is completely not concerned
> with where and how you will pop that window and source code file. I am 
concerned
> with what happens in a help buffer, after user requested help, *not* how user 
come
> to that point. I don't even pop a source file; just code for a function or 
var.

Sorry but did you really read bug report 9054?  That report says

  Two windows. Run `describe-function' on a function: The help buffer pops
  up in the other window. `other-window' and click the link to display the
  source file: my original buffer is gone. Very annoying.

  What I would like: Either a function that displays the source for the
  function at point in the other window or for the *Help* buffer to open
  the source file in the same window (i.e. the window which displays the
  *Help* buffer).

so it clearly talks about what happens *after* the user entered the help
buffer and not as you claim above "there you are concerned with wath
happens *before* user enters the help buffer and in which way user will
come to that buffer".

> I wish to make help buffer more usable, because I wisth to go away from 
Helpful
> and I see no reason why we should wait for something unrelated you guys had 10
> years to get consensus on but didn't :). Sorry, that one was hard not to pick 
on
> :).
>
> I know I sound biased, but the suggested patch works above my personal
> expectations. Suddenly the help buffer acts like a code browser.

I can't speak for others but IMHO a code browser should operate only on
the code itself and not on a copy of it.  I wouldn't even want to clone
a buffer or use an indirect buffer for that purpose.  For me it's an
essential aspect of free software that browsing and hacking code go hand
in hand.

> I really
> suggest you to try and click a bit around. It wasn't my intention, since I 
never
> do that in Helpful. I even don't know if it is possible there, but due to
> back/forward functionality in built-in help buffer, it works really nice.

Sorry but I won't be of much help in this regard.

martin