From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#30938: 27.0; `dired-do-create-files' etc.: do NOT always raise error if no files Date: Fri, 30 Mar 2018 10:57:03 +0300 Message-ID: <83lgeac7xs.fsf@gnu.org> References: <7ea429b5-b12e-4639-9d77-11db71504d9c@default> <87605g7xpj.fsf@mail.linkov.net> <70149736-0c90-4059-91d0-155144bf4abd@default> <87o9j6k5qx.fsf@mail.linkov.net> <8111e8b0-a7fb-4de4-9371-fd69c74c46e5@default> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1522396762 11076 195.159.176.226 (30 Mar 2018 07:59:22 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 30 Mar 2018 07:59:22 +0000 (UTC) Cc: 30938@debbugs.gnu.org, juri@linkov.net To: Drew Adams Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Mar 30 09:59:18 2018 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1f1owO-0002n1-IW for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Fri, 30 Mar 2018 09:59:16 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:41352 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1f1oyS-0002Wb-48 for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Fri, 30 Mar 2018 04:01:24 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:57728) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1f1ovG-0008B5-E4 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 30 Mar 2018 03:58:07 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1f1ovB-0002M2-Vj for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 30 Mar 2018 03:58:06 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.43]:51413) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1f1ovB-0002Lt-Rz for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 30 Mar 2018 03:58:01 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1f1ovB-0000FW-J3 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 30 Mar 2018 03:58:01 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Eli Zaretskii Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Fri, 30 Mar 2018 07:58:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 30938 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: Original-Received: via spool by 30938-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B30938.1522396652922 (code B ref 30938); Fri, 30 Mar 2018 07:58:01 +0000 Original-Received: (at 30938) by debbugs.gnu.org; 30 Mar 2018 07:57:32 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:59310 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1f1ouh-0000Eo-NU for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 30 Mar 2018 03:57:31 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:38298) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1f1oud-0000EX-LN for 30938@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 30 Mar 2018 03:57:28 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1f1ouU-00021X-1I for 30938@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 30 Mar 2018 03:57:22 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::e]:33533) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1f1ouT-00021T-TR; Fri, 30 Mar 2018 03:57:17 -0400 Original-Received: from [176.228.60.248] (port=3860 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1f1ouT-0005OV-3M; Fri, 30 Mar 2018 03:57:17 -0400 In-reply-to: <8111e8b0-a7fb-4de4-9371-fd69c74c46e5@default> (message from Drew Adams on Thu, 29 Mar 2018 21:01:44 -0700 (PDT)) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 208.118.235.43 X-BeenThere: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org List-Id: "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "bug-gnu-emacs" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.bugs:144722 Archived-At: > Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2018 21:01:44 -0700 (PDT) > From: Drew Adams > Cc: 30938@debbugs.gnu.org > > Instead of asking me if I don't see there is something > wrong with that, why don't you tell us what you think > is wrong with it? > > I said from the beginning: > > Please revert this change as soon as possible, > while you look for a better way to do what you > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > intended to do for it. > > I'm open to other ways to do what is needed, if they > are better. Feel free to propose something. > > I'm fine with what I proposed - either proposal: > > 1. What I proposed at the outset: revert the bad change > and do nothing until a better approach is decided on. > > 2. What I proposed in my follow-up: provide an INTERACTIVEP > arg to distinguish interactive use, and (at most) raise > a `user-error' only in the interactive-call case. > > You asked if there was a better approach than doing #2. > I replied that #2 seems fine, to me. But please feel free > to propose another approach, explaining why you think it's > better. > > Someone apparently thought it was OK to change 13 commands > to ALWAYS raise an error in the no-files case. Why are > you shocked to hear that I would be OK with changing those > same commands to not raise the error in the non-interactive > case - IOW, to return them to their longstanding behavior > in that case? A lot of discussion gone under the bridge, but I asked a question in the very beginning that was apparently ignored: Please provide at least one example (preferably more than one) of a real-life use case where these changes get in the way. Without an answer to that, I cannot see why we have to do anything about this issue, because up front I see no problem here at all, not one that has been spelled out.