[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]


From: Luc Teirlinck
Subject: find-file-not-found-functions
Date: Tue, 25 May 2004 15:58:35 -0500 (CDT)

A little while ago, I made a change to find-file-noselect-1 that
limited the scope of the `inhibit-read-only' binding in such a way
that `inhibit-read-only' became nil during the execution of
`find-file-not-found-functions' and `find-file-hook'.  Before, it was
bound to t.  The reason for the change was that the t binding was not
documented and that, in the case of `find-file-hook', it caused a bug.

As a side effect of fixing a bug in my previous change,
`inhibit-read-only' is back to t during the execution of
`find-file-not-found-functions'.  I now believe that, while my
previous change made sense for `find-file-hook', it might have been a
bad idea for `find-file-not-found-functions'.  I have the impression
that PC-look-for-include-file and maybe other functions rely on
inhibit-read-only being t.

What about just _documenting_ the fact that `inhibit-read-only' is t
during the execution of `find-file-not-found-functions'?  I could do
this, if desired (docstring and Elisp manual).



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]