[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Useless change in lisp.el?
From: |
Andreas Röhler |
Subject: |
Re: Useless change in lisp.el? |
Date: |
Mon, 26 Nov 2007 20:58:24 +0100 |
User-agent: |
KMail/1.9.5 |
Am Montag, 26. November 2007 20:26 schrieb Stefan Monnier:
> > Should you not cling to much to that disputed change
> > and no one else defends it, I would appreciate much
> > seeing it reverted.
>
> Rather than argue abuot the change itself, just give us some use
> case where the new behavior is problematic.
>
Can't see any new behaviour with this change, that's
it. AFAIU you introduced more lines of code and provision
for possible bugs not to fear before.
;; In case the beginning-of-defun-function uses the old calling
;; convention, fallback on the old implementation.
(wrong-number-of-arguments
(if (> arg 0)
(dotimes (i arg)
(funcall beginning-of-defun-function))
;; Better not call end-of-defun-function directly, in case
;; it's not defined.
(end-of-defun (- arg))))))
Now you have the old implementation, called if
`(wrong-number-of-arguments'--what wasn't at the table
before--new implementation and the default as always:
Three instead of two items to watch.
If you want Emacs as extendable, it matters, how
the code is written. If you introduce things without
valid reason--that's my view still--it will be less readable,
people need more time to dig through.
Andreas Röhler