[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: debug-on-entry question
From: |
Juri Linkov |
Subject: |
Re: debug-on-entry question |
Date: |
Wed, 22 Jun 2005 16:12:32 +0300 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.110004 (No Gnus v0.4) Emacs/22.0.50 (gnu/linux) |
> There are other commands using `a' letter to read function names (like
> `elp-instrument-function', etc.) where getting the default function name
> from the current buffer would be useful too. So maybe it's better to
> implement this in `call-interactively' for all commands using `a'?
>
> That seems like a good idea.
I have ideas for improving other code letters (for example, using ffap
for `f', `F', `D'), but they are much easier implementable in Lisp.
> I think that allowing customization at that level is asking for
> trouble. Customizating details of how a specific letter `b' works is
> not a problem, but letting programs simply redefine these codes is
> asking for trouble. What if two different packages both define Q but
> define it in different ways?
>
> It is much better if people keep on handling such cases by writing
> Lisp code as they already have.
The problem is in changing existing code letters. Emacs allows
customization of almost everything down to redefining built-in core
functions, but disallows customization of default methods for reading
input arguments. This is an artificial restriction contradicting the
principles of Emacs customization.
--
Juri Linkov
http://www.jurta.org/emacs/
- RE: debug-on-entry question, (continued)
Re: debug-on-entry question, Richard Stallman, 2005/06/19
Re: debug-on-entry question, Lute Kamstra, 2005/06/20
Re: debug-on-entry question,
Juri Linkov <=
RE: debug-on-entry question, Drew Adams, 2005/06/23