[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: Gnus: Thread notes?

From: Michael Heerdegen
Subject: Re: Gnus: Thread notes?
Date: Fri, 15 Dec 2017 20:54:49 +0100
User-agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.0.50 (gnu/linux)

Eric Abrahamsen <> writes:

> The only remaining issue is, I think it would be confusing to allow
>  `gnus-alter-articles-to-read-function' to be either a single function
>  value, or a list of functions. That makes it harder for consumers to
>  manipulate, as they have to check its current value first. What do
> you think about requiring a list?

I wouldn't find that good (it would be an unnecessary restriction for
users ability to configure stuff), and I think then also the variable
name would really not fit anymore the semantics.  I think it would then
be cleaner to introduce a new variable
`gnus-alter-articles-to-read-functions' (note the added "s").  Make it
so that

 - gnus-alter-articles-to-read-function (without "s") defaults to a new
 named function that would process the elements of the new variable
 which should be bound to a list (of functions), default nil.  That
 would be backward compatible.

 - People like me could use `add-function' on

 - People preferring a list could add their functions to the new
 variable binding.

I would still prefer a solution with only one variable, but given what
we currently have, and what you want, two variables may be better.  But
it's not really nice.

If I were you, I would tell people to use `add-function', it's not that
hard, and I heard most of Gnus users even use Emacs ;-)

BTW, I would expect that when the default value of
`gnus-alter-articles-to-read-function' is changed to a no-op function,
most people would just setq that variable to a function defined in their
config, there is no need to use `add-function' to configure things.  So
for users who don't like to use `add-function', nothing would change.
But OTOH, packages would be able to use `add-function' to change the
behavior (though, with a certain risk that the user inadvertently erases
that when setting the variable after a package has used `add-function'
on the binding).

Anyway, I expect that we are talking about very few users here.  But I
would hate a solution where I have to redefine a Gnus function just
because the provided means of configuration don't suffice.


reply via email to

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