[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: window-buffer-change-functions
From: |
Richard Stallman |
Subject: |
Re: window-buffer-change-functions |
Date: |
Fri, 23 Sep 2022 22:43:02 -0400 |
[[[ To any NSA and FBI agents reading my email: please consider ]]]
[[[ whether defending the US Constitution against all enemies, ]]]
[[[ foreign or domestic, requires you to follow Snowden's example. ]]]
> Therefore, in a majority of cases, running a hook with a buffer-local
> value processes both the buffer-local list *and* the global list for
> that variable.
That's true -- but I contend that this is a clean variation of the
general mechanism. Instead of "the buffer-local binding replaces the
default binding", we have "the buffer-local list's elements add to the
default list's elements." This behavior is to the usual buffer-local
binding behavior, as advising a function is to redefining it.
That makes it clean.
What window-buffer-change-functions and such do is ad hoc. The clean
and simple interface for this would be to have a frame functions list
and a window functions list. Each one would be simple and clean.
What we have now is artificially packing two different lists into two
bindings of one variable.
--
Dr Richard Stallman (https://stallman.org)
Chief GNUisance of the GNU Project (https://gnu.org)
Founder, Free Software Foundation (https://fsf.org)
Internet Hall-of-Famer (https://internethalloffame.org)