[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Mon, 7 Jun 2004 11:34:28 -0500 (CDT)
Stefan Monnier wrote:
let-binding inhibit-read-only would probably avoid this kind of problem and
would also be more correct, most likely.
You mean let-binding inhibit-read-only to t around the call to message?
That would not seem to be OK, because, one never knows, the user might
have, deliberately or accidentally, made the dired buffer writable.
Moving the `message' call outside the let scope is also a good change, in
It would seem to solve the problem, unless some other function called
dired-undo with inhibit-read-only bound to nil, in which case that
other function would need to be fixed. But dired-undo is not likely
to be called from other Lisp functions anyway.
Re: dired.el, Richard Stallman, 2004/06/07