[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: how-many/count-matches for non-interactive use

From: Luc Teirlinck
Subject: Re: how-many/count-matches for non-interactive use
Date: Fri, 22 Oct 2004 17:22:13 -0500 (CDT)

Sorry, I messed up a previous message, by not properly including it in
this thread.  Here is a copy:

I took a look at all calls to `interactive-p' in the Emacs Elisp code.
For many (actually most) it is impossible to check whether the call is
"correct" without studying tons of code, which I did not do and am not
going to do.  For most others, the current behavior prevents nuisance
messaging, as intended.

_Maybe_ the following are exceptions to that (they should be checked
further).  Most of these seem to abuse `interactive-p' to read their
arguments outside the interactive declaration.  (Something that should
be avoided anyway, regardless of the negative effect on keyboard

1. Info-goto-emacs-key-command-node

I can not check this one right now, because
`Info-goto-emacs-command-node' seems broken.  I do not even know
whether this is worth worrying about.  It would seem to make no sense
to define a macro that always checks the documentation for the _same_
command.  Better use bookmarks in that case.

2.  Three functions in `indent.el'.  I could check these out further.
    If they give any problems, they are trivial to fix.

Apart from that, two files _seem_ to have problems: ibuf-ext.el, in
particular the function `ibuffer-jump-to-buffer' and allout.el, in
particular `allout-init', `allout-backward-current-level' and maybe
others.  I CC the maintainers of those files.  They can better
determine than I do whether the calls to interactive-p in those files
are appropriate and in particular, appropriate for keyboard macros.

Like I said I do not know whether the above list of (potential)
problems is exhaustive.  It probably is not.  Checking every single
call to `interactive-p' in detail is hopeless.  But what we know is
that the current behavior of `interactive-p', which has been in place
for a long time, has not exactly led to a flood of complaints from
keyboard macro users.  Keyboard macro users appear to be happy with
the current situation. What we do not know is whether changing the
behavior will lead to a flood a bug reports and complaints about macro
execution speed getting ruined.



reply via email to

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