From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: martin rudalics Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#21695: 25.0.50; Change most occurrences of `setq' in Emacs manual to `customize-set-variable'? Really? Date: Thu, 16 Sep 2021 08:56:48 +0200 Message-ID: References: <97d3ff2c-9e72-4004-88a9-08130ac99a74@default> <838s0fpixr.fsf@gnu.org> <83k0jtr45c.fsf@gnu.org> <87v93avtoe.fsf@gnus.org> <87r1dyvtav.fsf@gnus.org> <87mtolx6de.fsf@gnus.org> <87ilz9x5c8.fsf@gnus.org> <87y284rb1z.fsf@gnus.org> <0d48a23084a8b0435f37@heytings.org> <83h7eqf9wx.fsf@gnu.org> <0d48a230848de1d1b255@heytings.org> <83ee9uf82a.fsf@gnu.org> <0d48a23084cf7a569554@heytings.org> <83czpef6hj.fsf@gnu.org> <97113ce8ba560c9ac39f@heytings.org> <6b0f1c8e-9cfa-99b5-2862-d25e85cff3e5@gmx.at> <97113ce8bab1a4e2456d@heytings.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="30233"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: larsi@gnus.org, 21695@debbugs.gnu.org, hmelman@gmail.com, gregory@heytings.org To: rms@gnu.org Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Thu Sep 16 08:57:50 2021 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1mQlLB-0007gN-TP for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Thu, 16 Sep 2021 08:57:49 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:54226 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mQlLA-00063k-43 for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Thu, 16 Sep 2021 02:57:48 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:57790) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mQlKP-00060s-Vx for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Thu, 16 Sep 2021 02:57:02 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]:42108) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mQlKP-00073i-Ou for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Thu, 16 Sep 2021 02:57:01 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1mQlKP-0008Ex-Iy for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Thu, 16 Sep 2021 02:57:01 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: martin rudalics Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Thu, 16 Sep 2021 06:57:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 21695 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs Original-Received: via spool by 21695-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B21695.163177541931667 (code B ref 21695); Thu, 16 Sep 2021 06:57:01 +0000 Original-Received: (at 21695) by debbugs.gnu.org; 16 Sep 2021 06:56:59 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:53654 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1mQlKN-0008Eh-GG for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 16 Sep 2021 02:56:59 -0400 Original-Received: from mout.gmx.net ([212.227.15.15]:50397) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1mQlKK-0008ES-EI for 21695@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 16 Sep 2021 02:56:58 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=gmx.net; s=badeba3b8450; t=1631775409; bh=wTidRtgPPItr978KbKpRejMeM7dVPMMIg8LgVzBAlZI=; h=X-UI-Sender-Class:Subject:To:Cc:References:From:Date:In-Reply-To; b=XVqhJsspJMkQREyGIkULYzwhtcEKRKXV/0jHMd+syqlLt8zCQiT2I1+N+iM9aneHV TuVsdIlSQx+7uaZYItNUbHe6ehDSt+SIJhlTTQDrB4bX0PKZG+XSxR/2YvKpwAqqRa yVZbFoBULV71ERrO85lbxL069JH+WCkraQRCkyho= X-UI-Sender-Class: 01bb95c1-4bf8-414a-932a-4f6e2808ef9c Original-Received: from [192.168.1.101] ([212.95.5.163]) by mail.gmx.net (mrgmx005 [212.227.17.190]) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 1N2V0H-1mtwHm0mbv-013v7G; Thu, 16 Sep 2021 08:56:49 +0200 In-Reply-To: Content-Language: en-US X-Provags-ID: V03:K1:eekQhVsiX8trrNHl0JEVk01AXxpGTv38jDd+6woAmttOodGMfXo WKenC4kLonizH3o2OpWqMoPUHZcUIm40vCVv+9PNTMCY1/Gkur+Z2S8Uw3H7GMwsgHvS97q +3OgCDI6/O0jvwkCYklGue5027A4w0PQgDVIZG5pxaH4ap7oZL6Y1vGBTNg01VUsx40Ak4P vYiRHYFD9ohR87LYNOgpQ== X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V03:K0:VUNnz5TBQeg=:d3VldUg/R0jcPD2Ka03bDb Mvbm3/rvS5WaZ9j3us2n3ovv/1+FMjQrFYGbZivrDgaPcfNKbXjU4tPtYOxLyuCS5uQqz7KEB FJscji+s+d2DQPtCQH118uSQtpkdWQ4WXWGyutxf3dOLdcXdg0XwtDPpa9qpBl8QF0R49BGdV mZTonPqT29xpCeTNw+M1G2gFnwbtcTiJkkZ1JP2qtRuEEceREFDTONv1Y2lregM5T6ry30BJY VuKdTJ8TBAxzgpBu07MMBtHYcEgA8HMaRdU+72ARGJUwwBKGSfVEuDYbXgN79iYo5+gZ21QZd D62+3iMeE6miMNGWzEwfjPUsMpJ+/3t0J6NV4PMBu6PqBNEtWaF69zCL9PWIS6OFev9NwHDet 2kfQ6TlYxuh6o093GaUV7G5ODF3a9VO96jtD2AcHR0XYGi0EBsK0fpQgK4ysH6o9Z8btyeYWE cY6oxiQkIbItJ8f8cXBsRPYbwBOqw6TP65Mp32FLjStfRD79woQ4833D9ok2lo2fA+w7RqAyy 4t3n+Ycobjzd0bqlXPpEUTqiIT3VBw+FbeGrh3hCihBeBmficlLDW0UcoMzSu2n2x6u61ERJY 33zqy29ttcxNyOQefRkmsZXi0bOMcN3R60VctwEkSuLD9Gt6L227FhWF2bOC82fHRpPj/A7oW 1Dqc2sKuqxPWD13soKGhws6ByUjbm3bRbfps+BNWaow5WNAW5ZmzxF8uwm1hF3q5/Mfqj7CDp 7IP3hvKByq4iHVglRRbdA44wJysqhv8e+2O2kMHnSpSEsAsBEXqWUebfJj8h76KVGl0EBuQf X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list 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-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "bug-gnu-emacs" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.bugs:214446 Archived-At: > > > The point is not to display unnecessary warnings. The point is only > > > to display warnings for custom variables that should not be set with > > > setq because they have a :set form, or IOW, to display warnings for > > > custom variables that should be set with customize-set-variables. > > > I checked most of our uses of :set and agree that they usually behave > > well-mannered so using `setq' instead is practically always a bug > > indeed. > > I am puzzled by that statement. First, it seems to say that the > definitions of the variables are careful, I probably should have said "that the definitions of the variables have been written carefully" so nobody would have come to a conclusion like > so that they DTRT if the > user sets one with setq in an init file. which is not what I had in mind. > Then it seems to say that setting one of these variable with setq (in > an init file?) is almost surely a bug. This is the conclusion I had in mind. > Those two statements are almost opposites. > > Did I misunderstand? Either you did or my formulation was bad. martin.