Re: Hourglass only for X-windows?

["Eli Zaretskii" <eliz@gnu.org>]

> From: "Lennart Borgman" <lennart.borgman.073@student.lu.se>
> Cc: <hunterd42@comcast.net>, <jasonr@gnu.org>,
> 	<kobayays@otsukakj.co.jp>, <emacs-devel@gnu.org>
> Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2005 02:03:45 +0100
> 
> From: "Eli Zaretskii" <eliz@gnu.org>
> 
> > I don't see how this is more readable.  One cannot understand the
> > meaning of HAVE_HOURGLASS without grepping thru lots of places.
> 
> Hm ;-)
> 
> There is something I do not understand in your argument. How about
> HAVE_MOUSE, HAVE_SOUND?

These are configure-time definitions, unlike HAVE_HOURGLASS.  They
test the basic capabilities of the underlying platform, while
HAVE_HOURGLASS tells something about Emacs support of the feature, not
about its availability on the platform.

> >   #if defined (USE_X_TOOLKIT) || defined (HAVE_NTGUI)
> >
> > So this is clearly an accepted practice in Emacs.
> 
> I find it very hard to guess what this define is for without reading the
> code. Using names like HAVE_MOUSE, HAVE_HOURGLASS makes it much more easy to
> guess IMO. And I think that is important if you are scanning the code
> quickly trying to find things, see the structure etc. It may of course
> depend on how you are thinking, but for me this makes sense. I would guess
> it makes sense for a lot of other people too (but I am of course not sure.)

Jason responded with a clear and eloquent explanation, and I can only
say I agree with him 100%.