[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: custom-set-variables considered harmful

From: Clément Pit-Claudel
Subject: Re: custom-set-variables considered harmful
Date: Fri, 24 Nov 2017 12:37:45 -0500
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.4.0

On 2017-11-24 02:16, Stefan Monnier wrote:
>> Is there a particular reson you're not using ‘customize-set-variable’
>> for all values?
> Because I want the code to look as much as possible like "manually
> written Elisp", and `setq` is what is used in 99% of the Elisp
> customization code.

I think that's a bug, though — multiple packages of mine have specific code to 
deal with this (users using setq instead of customize-set-variable).

>> It would be more consistent, and also avoid problems
>> in case a package is changed and a setter function is added to
>> a variable which previously did not use it.
> Note that as long as the `setq` is within the magical
> custom-autogenerated-user-settings form, it will behave correctly even
> if the variable has a setter function.

I like the direction of this patch very much, but I'm not a fan of this: it 
seems too error-prone.  It'd be much better if copying from the special form 
was safe (at least in the vast majority of cases).

> The difference will only affect
> those users who take this code and then copy it elsewhere.

But isn't one of the selling points of this patch to make copying easier?


reply via email to

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