[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: Eli Zaretskii
Subject: Re: yes-or-no-p prompt conditionally broken in master?
Date: Sat, 05 Sep 2015 10:03:05 +0300

> From: David Kastrup <address@hidden>
> Cc: address@hidden,  address@hidden,  address@hidden,  address@hidden,  
> address@hidden,  address@hidden,  address@hidden,  address@hidden
> Date: Fri, 04 Sep 2015 22:04:27 +0200
> Eli Zaretskii <address@hidden> writes:
> > I meant it already works if the script supplies "y" or "n", not
> > literally "yes" and "no".  If you had the latter in mind, then I see
> > no reason for a script to supply "yes" when it knows that Emacs needs
> > "y".
> How would the script know which user settings for the proposed
> customizable yes-or-no-p behavior options are active when it is used in
> a manner reading in the user init file before proceeding?

The issue at hand was whether we need to have a way to make y-or-n-p
behave like yes-or-no-p.  So the scripts we are supposed to discuss
are those that invoke y-or-n-p, whose behavior is not subject to
customizations under my proposal.

So the scripts should always supply y followed by a newline.

> > But we could, of course, extend y-or-n-p to accept "yes" and "no" when
> > in batch mode.
> >
> > IOW, it's a separate issue, whose solution is not necessarily to make
> > y-or-n-p work as yes-or-no-p.
> It's not entirely separate since it extends the manners in which Emacs
> might "legitimately" behave.

In that regard, it indeed is not separate.  But the number of manners
in which Emacs might behave is truly infinite, so IMO it isn't useful
to lump issues together just because they belong to that wide class.

The problem you describe with scripts that feed Emacs with "yes" when
they should have fed it with "y", if it exists, is already here.  We
should have heard about it by now.  If, for some reason, we didn't and
will hear later, we could always extend y-or-n-p as I mentioned above.

IOW, it's a separate issue because its reasons and solution are
independent of the one which triggered this thread.

reply via email to

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