[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: yes-or-no-p prompt conditionally broken in master?

From: Marcin Borkowski
Subject: Re: yes-or-no-p prompt conditionally broken in master?
Date: Fri, 04 Sep 2015 14:39:07 +0200

On 2015-09-04, at 14:30, Eli Zaretskii <address@hidden> wrote:

>> From: Marcin Borkowski <address@hidden>
>> Date: Fri, 04 Sep 2015 12:32:04 +0200
>> On 2015-09-04, at 11:26, Andreas Schwab <address@hidden> wrote:
>> > Eli Zaretskii <address@hidden> writes:
>> >
>> >> Any objections to removing yes-or-no-p (with a defalias for backward
>> >> compatibility, of course) and making y-or-n-p serve both duties,
>> >> controlled by some defcustom?
>> >
>> > That doesn't make sense.  They implement different intented meaning.
>> +1.  They serve different purposes, and they are both needed.
> This is a misunderstanding: I didn't suggest to remove any
> functionality.  You will still be able to do exactly what each of
> these functions do, just their implementation will be in a single
> function.

I see.  Sorry.

>> While I understand that someone might want to make yes-or-no-p
>> behave like y-or-n-p all the time, someone else (like, say, me)
>> might want to use y-or-n-p in places where just a confirmation is a
>> nice thing to have, and yes-or-no-p in places where you really want
>> to make sure that the user does not accidentally press `y'.
> That's a no-brainer, and I never said anything to the contrary.



Marcin Borkowski
Faculty of Mathematics and Computer Science
Adam Mickiewicz University

reply via email to

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