From: Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca>
To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>
Cc: 35508@debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: bug#35508: 27.0.50; Fine-ordering of functions on hooks
Date: Sat, 11 May 2019 09:26:10 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <jwvtve16sm6.fsf-monnier+emacs@gnu.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <835zqhdwnk.fsf@gnu.org> (Eli Zaretskii's message of "Sat, 11 May 2019 15:05:03 +0300")
>> Other objections?
> Thanks. Should we perhaps change 100 to 110 and 90 to 100?
You mean make it go https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Up_to_eleven ? ;-)
> And perhaps not document the 110 value? Just a thought.
I think we do want to document values greater than what `t` does: it can
be important (e.g. for syntax-ppss-flush-cache) to make sure we stay
closer to the end than those hooks appended via `t` for weaker reasons
(e.g. because they don't want to be before some other function, although
they don't really care if they're the very last one or not).
Also I think it's important to use the same convention as for add-function.
But what I wonder is whether we should enforce the convention: currently
we don't in add-function (and in this add-hook patch), so you can use
a depth of 8345 if you feel like: it's really just a convention.
Also, maybe the docs should insist on the fact that 100/-100 should
basically never be used since they imply that you're 100% sure that
noone will ever need to come before/after you, and you can never be sure
100%.
Stefan
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-05-11 13:26 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-04-30 20:37 bug#35508: 27.0.50; Fine-ordering of functions on hooks Stefan Monnier
2019-04-30 21:37 ` Drew Adams
2019-04-30 22:31 ` Stefan Monnier
2019-05-01 18:00 ` Eli Zaretskii
2019-05-01 20:29 ` Stefan Monnier
2019-05-08 18:32 ` Stefan Monnier
2019-05-11 12:05 ` Eli Zaretskii
2019-05-11 13:26 ` Stefan Monnier [this message]
2019-05-11 13:54 ` Eli Zaretskii
2019-05-13 13:29 ` Stefan Monnier
2019-05-29 19:56 ` Stefan Monnier
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
List information: https://www.gnu.org/software/emacs/
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=jwvtve16sm6.fsf-monnier+emacs@gnu.org \
--to=monnier@iro.umontreal.ca \
--cc=35508@debbugs.gnu.org \
--cc=eliz@gnu.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this public inbox
https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/emacs.git
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).