[Top][All Lists]

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

bug#8368: 24.0.50; "temp" means "help" - rename or at least document

From: martin rudalics
Subject: bug#8368: 24.0.50; "temp" means "help" - rename or at least document
Date: Tue, 01 May 2012 10:08:57 +0200

> IF a programmer wants a temp buffer without that help
> stuff then s?he can do something like what I wrote, as a workaround: define a
> macro that uses `w-o-t-t-b', but first removes the help-stuff hooks and 
> them afterward.  That's all.

S?he could also write such a macro from scratch and post the result here
together with a suitable name.

> Your suggestion was IIUC to instead use `w-o-t-t-b' and just turn off 
> in the BODY.  OK, but that means that help-mode is entered and exited for
> nothing - the hooks are run uselessly.

Who cares?  The overhead for removing and adding a hook (with all the
necessary protection) is just as high.

> That's all I was pointing out.  Nothing
> wrong with such useless work, but it, like my workaround, does not seem like 
> solution to the problem.

We agree here.

>> Obviously, dealing with `temp-buffer-show-hook' in
>> `with-output-to-plain-temp-buffer' isn't necessary either if you don't
>> run `help-mode-setup' before.
> Ah, yes.  Of course that means paying even more attention etc.
> Anyway, thanks for thinking about this.  I really would like to see Emacs 
> in this regard.  To my mind (not having thought much about it, and being 
> ignorant about it), I would think that inheritance could be used to factor out
> the stuff that is not specifically for help mode (i.e., have the help-mode 
> inherit from that).

That's the way to go, yes.  The question is rather one of how to avoid
confusing users when we have, for example, a `temp-buffer-setup-hook'
and a `plain-temp-buffer-setup-hook' and BOTH get run when we invoke the
inheriting macro.


reply via email to

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