bug-gnu-emacs
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

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

bug#2355: 23.0.60; Enabling minor-mode disables major mode


From: Juanma Barranquero
Subject: bug#2355: 23.0.60; Enabling minor-mode disables major mode
Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2009 18:48:42 +0100

On Wed, Feb 18, 2009 at 17:58, Stefan Monnier <address@hidden> wrote:

> This seems like a misuse because it just reflects the
> author's preference.

OK.

> My 57.3.4.1 here says:
>
>      You can use the `mode' "variable" to set minor modes as well as the
>   major modes; in fact, you can use it more than once, first to set the
>   major mode and then to set minor modes which are specific to particular
>   buffers.  But most minor modes should not be specified in the file at
>   all, because they represent user preferences.

OK, I'll eat my words right now :-)  (Sorry, Leo, you were right)

OTOH, I think that's a documentation bug (ordering, not content).
There's this paragraph at the start:

  You can specify any number of variables/value pairs in this way, each
  pair with a colon and semicolon as shown above.  `mode: MODENAME;'
  specifies the major mode; this should come first in the line.  The
  VALUEs are not evaluated; they are used literally.  Here is an example
  that specifies Lisp mode and sets two variables with numeric values:

then about fifty lines discussing other things, then

      Some "variable names" have special meanings in a local variables
   list.  Specifying the "variable" `mode' really sets the major mode,
   while any value specified for the "variable" `eval' is simply evaluated
   as an expression (its value is ignored). [...etc...]

(which again seems to suggest that mode: sets the major mode, BTW),
then the two paragraphs that talk about minor modes. So after three
quick browses of that node in search of mode information, I failed to
get the significant info. While I readily admit that my reading
ability in hurried situations (and foreign languages) could be
improved, I'd like to suggest that 57.3.4.1 would also benefit from
some reordering. :)

    Juanma






reply via email to

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