[Top][All Lists]

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

Why is `C-M-x' only for top-level defuns?

From: Stephen J. Turnbull
Subject: Why is `C-M-x' only for top-level defuns?
Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2012 14:23:30 +0900

Drew Adams writes:

 > Why not let `C-M-x' re-evaluate a "defun" (defcustom, defface,
 > etc.) that is not necessarily at top level?  E.g., with point on,
 > say, `defface' in this sexp, why shouldn't `C-M-x' redefine the
 > face?

I don't see any reason in the `when' you're talking about, but in many
cases such forms will refer to let-bound variables and the like, and
the results there could be rather confusing.

reply via email to

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