[Top][All Lists]

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

bug#32643: 26; minor-mode variables

From: Eli Zaretskii
Subject: bug#32643: 26; minor-mode variables
Date: Thu, 06 Sep 2018 17:33:51 +0300

> Date: Thu, 6 Sep 2018 07:18:45 -0700 (PDT)
> From: Drew Adams <address@hidden>
> Cc: address@hidden
> But the real point of the bug report is that we _do_ say that a
> minor mode should have (and set) a mode variable:
>   Define a variable whose name ends in '-mode'.  We call this the
>   "mode variable".  The minor mode command should set this
>   variable.
> And that "should" is not respected by some variables from basic
> Emacs itself - in particular `auto-fill-mode'. Shouldn't it be?

FWIW, I see no need to demand 100% consistency here.

> Nothing requires everything in the Emacs distribution to respect
> each convention that Emacs sets forth. But is there a reason why
> `auto-fill-mode' (and others?) should not respect this convention?
> If nothing else, I'm curious why the exception(s).

Most probably, historical accidents.  But even finding that out is a
non-trivial amount of work.

> (The bug report also asks whether it's a bug for a mode not to have
> a variable, and suggests that it is. And if it's not, the report asks that
> the Elisp manual give some guidance about when a mode should
> not or need not have a variable.)

I think the manual already does what you want, it just doesn't say
this is a bug (because it isn't, IMO).

reply via email to

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