From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Kevin Ryde Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#5294: 23.1; unload-feature disable minor-mode Date: Wed, 06 Jan 2010 12:01:04 +1100 Message-ID: <87zl4srqr3.fsf@blah.blah> References: <87aawwp631.fsf@blah.blah> <87tyv4njo7.fsf@blah.blah> <87bpha7ptb.fsf@blah.blah> <87iqbgt9h4.fsf@blah.blah> Reply-To: Kevin Ryde , 5294@debbugs.gnu.org NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1262744327 993 80.91.229.12 (6 Jan 2010 02:18:47 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 6 Jan 2010 02:18:47 +0000 (UTC) Cc: 5294@debbugs.gnu.org To: Juanma Barranquero Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Jan 06 03:18:40 2010 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1NSLTq-00043K-F9 for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Wed, 06 Jan 2010 03:18:38 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:48455 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1NSLTq-0003SG-OH for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Tue, 05 Jan 2010 21:18:38 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1NSKY1-0006Go-3S for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 05 Jan 2010 20:18:53 -0500 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1NSKXw-0006CD-Kz for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 05 Jan 2010 20:18:52 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=36463 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1NSKXw-0006By-7O for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 05 Jan 2010 20:18:48 -0500 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.43]:40803) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1NSKXv-00077n-UT for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 05 Jan 2010 20:18:48 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1NSKHh-0003rZ-N7; Tue, 05 Jan 2010 20:02:01 -0500 X-Loop: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Mail-Followup-To: Kevin Ryde , 5294@debbugs.gnu.org Resent-From: Kevin Ryde Original-Sender: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Resent-To: owner@debbugs.gnu.org Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Wed, 06 Jan 2010 01:02:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org X-Emacs-PR-Message: followup 5294 X-Emacs-PR-Package: emacs X-Emacs-PR-Keywords: Original-Received: via spool by 5294-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B5294.126273968314834 (code B ref 5294); Wed, 06 Jan 2010 01:02:01 +0000 Original-Received: (at 5294) by debbugs.gnu.org; 6 Jan 2010 01:01:23 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1NSKH4-0003rD-OM for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 05 Jan 2010 20:01:22 -0500 Original-Received: from mailout1-6.pacific.net.au ([61.8.2.213] helo=mailout1.pacific.net.au) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1NSKH2-0003r5-1w for 5294@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 05 Jan 2010 20:01:21 -0500 Original-Received: from mailproxy2.pacific.net.au (mailproxy2.pacific.net.au [61.8.2.163]) by mailout1.pacific.net.au (Postfix) with ESMTP id 20F11511F66; Wed, 6 Jan 2010 12:01:14 +1100 (EST) Original-Received: from blah.blah (ppp26FC.dyn.pacific.net.au [61.8.38.252]) by mailproxy2.pacific.net.au (Postfix) with ESMTP id 705342741F; Wed, 6 Jan 2010 12:01:13 +1100 (EST) Original-Received: from gg by blah.blah with local (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1NSKGm-0005AY-Pw; Wed, 06 Jan 2010 12:01:04 +1100 In-Reply-To: (Juanma Barranquero's message of "Wed, 6 Jan 2010 01:23:41 +0100") User-Agent: Gnus/5.110011 (No Gnus v0.11) Emacs/23.1 (gnu/linux) X-Spam-Score: -3.5 (---) X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.11 Precedence: list X-Spam-Score: -3.5 (---) Resent-Date: Tue, 05 Jan 2010 20:02:01 -0500 X-detected-operating-system: by monty-python.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 3) 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: , Original-Sender: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.bugs:33977 Archived-At: Juanma Barranquero writes: > > How is passing that test (presumibly, either a form or a predicate > function) to define-minor-mode better than putting it into > FEATURE-unload-function? Principally that define-minor-mode knows what things it did and therefore should be undone, or why they might not be undone at the present time. I think it would be rather repetitive to be obliged to write a FOO-unload-function whenever making a minor mode. Which, err, presumes that there may be standardized things that should be considered and/or undone for unloading a mode. I see you say there's normally not -- where I say there could be a disable or a caution to avoid likely breakage, removal from the minor modes menu, etc.