Richard Heck wrote: > I propose something along the following lines, but I am not at all sure > about this. I'm trying to do two things here. (i) Check whether a Buffer is > dirty whenever it is destroyed. I see this as a last ditch effort to avoid > dataloss, and one that should rarely if ever be triggered. Indeed, in some > ways I'm inclined to assert here...after saving! (ii) Do the same check > whenever a tab is hidden. I don't think dirty tabs should be allowed to be > hidden. It will lead to surprises later.
doesnt it break multiple windows view? ie the buffer might be dirty, but i want to have different set of visible buffers in each window, so in the second window the dirty one could be unvisible and thats fine imho. pavel
