On Thu, Sep 12 2013, Mark Walters <markwalters1009@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi > > On Tue, 10 Sep 2013, David Bremner <david@tethera.net> wrote: >>> Ideally, we would put this output in the notmuch errors buffer but the >>> handler is called asynchronously so we don't know when the output will >>> appear. Thus if we put it straight into the errors buffer it could get >>> interleaved with other errors, otoh we can't easily tell when we >>> have got all the error output so can't wait until the process is complete. >> >> Hi Mark; >> >> I think your patch is OK, but would it be much harder to created a named >> buffer like *notmuch-view-$message-d* ? (using e.g. the code from >> notmuch-show). I might make debugging easier. > > Yes this is easy. There are several possibilities and I am not sure > which is best (some are clearly bad but are worth mentioning anyway). > > 1) have a single buffer for part errors; this would accumulate stuff and > output seems to get interleaved so this is probably useless. > > 2) have a buffer for each part viewer as you describe. > > 3) have a buffer for each part viewer but start its name with a space so > it doesn't show up in buffer lists but is findable (maybe) > > 4) stick with just the temp buffer approach Maybe check whether the temp buffer is empty. if not, use (buffer-string) & (notmuch-logged-error) to append the message to the *Notmuch errors* buffer... just that notmuch-logged-error signals an error which we may not want to do... We could unify to "*Notmuch Messages*" and have more functions to append data there... somewhat analogous to current *Messages* buffer just that that one has so much noise... Tomi > > Also, we could have it togglable with some sort of debug flag. In some > senses 3 is nice but you would probably end up with 10's or even > hundreds of hidden buffers which seems bad. In 2 you see them so you > probably kill them as you go but I think they would be pretty > annoying. A key difference from the accumulated show/search/pick buffers > is that, at some point, you did want to see those buffers. > > Since all these approaches are easy to implement it is really up to us > which we want. > > Any thoughts? > > Mark > > >> >> Of course those buffers would accumulate, along with show, search and >> pick buffers... >> >> Or we could push this as is, and add some debugging facility later like >> a variable notmuch-view-errors-buffer. >> >> d > _______________________________________________ > notmuch mailing list > notmuch@notmuchmail.org > http://notmuchmail.org/mailman/listinfo/notmuch