[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
bug#33669: 26.1; Buffer-menu-mode bad UX
From: |
Eli Zaretskii |
Subject: |
bug#33669: 26.1; Buffer-menu-mode bad UX |
Date: |
Sat, 05 Jan 2019 10:44:51 +0200 |
Ping! Ping! Devon, could you please try the proposed fix?
> Date: Sat, 22 Dec 2018 12:50:10 +0200
> From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>
> Cc: 33669@debbugs.gnu.org
>
> Ping! Devon, could you please try the proposed fix?
>
> > Date: Sat, 08 Dec 2018 13:07:42 +0200
> > From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>
> > Cc: 33669@debbugs.gnu.org
> >
> > > From: Devon Sean McCullough <Emacs-Hacker2018@jovi.net>
> > > Date: Sat, 8 Dec 2018 10:06:48 +0800
> > >
> > > When Buffer-menu-execute asks
> > >
> > > Buffer foo modified; kill anyway? (yes or no)
> > >
> > > and the reply is no,
> > > that line is removed anyway, deceiving the user
> > > by making the buffer menu incorrect.
> > >
> > > The user will promptly seek out such buffers — but they disappeared,
> > > giving the distressing wrong impression that they were killed anyway.
> >
> > Thanks for reporting this. Does the patch below give good results?
> >
> > diff --git a/lisp/buff-menu.el b/lisp/buff-menu.el
> > index bc1288a..95746b3 100644
> > --- a/lisp/buff-menu.el
> > +++ b/lisp/buff-menu.el
> > @@ -476,9 +476,10 @@ Buffer-menu-execute
> > (tabulated-list-set-col 2 " " t))
> > (error (warn "Error saving %s" buffer))))
> > (if delete
> > - (unless (eq buffer (current-buffer))
> > - (kill-buffer buffer)
> > - (tabulated-list-delete-entry))
> > + (if (and (not (eq buffer (current-buffer)))
> > + (kill-buffer buffer))
> > + (tabulated-list-delete-entry)
> > + (forward-line 1))
> > (forward-line 1)))))))))
> >
> > (defun Buffer-menu-select ()
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
- bug#33669: 26.1; Buffer-menu-mode bad UX,
Eli Zaretskii <=