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

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

bug#45765: [PATCH] 28.0.50; Change default-directory before prompting in


From: Dmitry Gutov
Subject: bug#45765: [PATCH] 28.0.50; Change default-directory before prompting in project-compile
Date: Sat, 16 Jan 2021 05:51:47 +0200
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.10.0

On 13.01.2021 21:46, Kévin Le Gouguec wrote:
Dmitry Gutov <dgutov@yandex.ru> writes:

I'm not a big fan of the 'interactive' argument. It could be replaced
by using (called-interactively-p 'interactive), though I'm not sure
how idiomatic that is.

Not necessarily a fan either, but my takeaway from recent discussions on
emacs-devel is that the argument is preferred to called-interactively-p,
which should only be used when a function's arglist is set in stone.

<E1k7A3J-0005gG-4K@fencepost.gnu.org>
https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel/2020-08/msg00463.html

<jwvzh6ubtbe.fsf-monnier+emacs@gnu.org>
https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel/2020-08/msg00472.html

I see a few dozen hits for "&optional \([\w-]+ \)*interactive)" under
lisp/, so it seems to be an established practice.

All right, that makes sense. It will help the next time such question comes up.

PS: I've just seen Juri's reponse in bug#45765#26; I'm glad there is a
consensus on the first patch, because after looking at more in-tree
examples of optional INTERACTIVE arguments, I found myself agonizing
over spelling the spec (list nil nil t), '(nil nil t), or "i\ni\np".

I know the feeling ;-)

Patch installed, closing. Thanks again.





reply via email to

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