[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: (interactive) arguments
|
From: |
Jean-Christophe Helary |
|
Subject: |
Re: (interactive) arguments |
|
Date: |
Fri, 3 Jan 2020 01:42:50 +0900 |
> On Jan 3, 2020, at 1:30, Marcin Borkowski <mbork@mbork.pl> wrote:
>
>
> On 2020-01-02, at 17:08, Jean-Christophe Helary
> <jean.christophe.helary@traduction-libre.org> wrote:
>
>>> On Jan 2, 2020, at 1:26, Jean-Christophe Helary
>>> <jean.christophe.helary@traduction-libre.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Jan 2, 2020, at 0:51, Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I'm looking for a way to add a default value to interactive by just
>>>>> using the "string" version:
>>>> [...]
>>>>> Is that possible ?
>>>>
>>>> No: you have to use the "list" version (which is really the
>>>> "expression" version).
>>>
>>> Thank you Stefan !
>>
>> Now, when I use the "expression" version, it looks like the arguments are
>> not assigned to variables as they are input, so for ex, I can't use a
>> default value for the input based on the first input...
>>
>> Is there a way around that ?
>
> Does this help?
>
> http://mbork.pl/2015-09-12_A_trick_with_argument_for_interactive_call
Yes ! Excellent !
> Well, it is quite similar to the let=/=let* distinction. If only there were
> something like interactive*…
That's exactly what I was thinking !!! :)
Thank you.
Jean-Christophe Helary
-----------------------------------------------
http://mac4translators.blogspot.com @brandelune