[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Patch for bug in w3m-generate-new-buffer
- From: Boruch Baum <boruch_baum@xxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2018 07:11:50 -0500
- X-ml-name: emacs-w3m
- X-mail-count: 12894
- References: <firstname.lastname@example.org>
On 2018-02-08 02:51, Vladimir Sedach wrote:
> There was a serious bug introduced on 2017-10-13 to
> w3m-generate-new-buffer: new buffers would always get number 1, there
> would be duplicate buffers with number 1. You can verify this by opening
> a new w3m buffer (via w3m-search-new-session, for example) when multiple
> w3m buffers are already open, and trying to use w3m-previous-buffer.
> This bug also masked a problem with the new LAST parameter to
> w3m-copy-buffer in w3m-view-this-url-1.
> A patch is attached.
> Thank you,
I need to leave soon, but here's my attempt to simplify the patch by
removing the nested `let's and placing the simple `if' alternatives
first. I haven't tested it or the original to be sure either works and
whether they're equivalent.
(if (not w3m-use-title-buffer-name)
(let* ((all-w3m-buffers (w3m-list-buffers))
(memq (current-buffer) all-w3m-buffers)
(new-buffer-number (w3m-buffer-number (car tailbufs))))
(when (string-match "\\*w3m\\*\\(<\\([0-9]+\\)>\\)?\\'" name)
(setq name "*w3m*"))
(if (not (and tailbufs new-buffer-number))
(let ((n (1+ new-buffer-number)))
(dolist (buf (cdr tailbufs))
(w3m-buffer-set-number buf (setq n (1+ n))))
(format "%s<%d>" name (1+ new-buffer-number))))))))
CA45 09B5 5351 7C11 A9D1 7286 0036 9E45 1595 8BC0