From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Richard Stallman Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: customize-mark-as-set for M-x foo-mode Date: Wed, 21 Aug 2002 19:57:54 -0600 (MDT) Sender: emacs-devel-admin@gnu.org Message-ID: <200208220157.g7M1vs110540@wijiji.santafe.edu> References: <200208192055.g7JKttB15245@rum.cs.yale.edu> <200208210012.g7L0CLQ10068@wijiji.santafe.edu> <200208211529.g7LFT5e24786@rum.cs.yale.edu> Reply-To: rms@gnu.org NNTP-Posting-Host: localhost.gmane.org X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1029981996 9832 127.0.0.1 (22 Aug 2002 02:06:36 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2002 02:06:36 +0000 (UTC) Cc: monnier+gnu/emacs@rum.cs.yale.edu, emacs-devel@gnu.org Return-path: Original-Received: from quimby.gnus.org ([80.91.224.244]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 17hhMp-0002YT-00 for ; Thu, 22 Aug 2002 04:06:35 +0200 Original-Received: from monty-python.gnu.org ([199.232.76.173]) by quimby.gnus.org with esmtp (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian)) id 17hhpU-0004YN-00 for ; Thu, 22 Aug 2002 04:36:12 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.10) id 17hhNz-0003Mf-00; Wed, 21 Aug 2002 22:07:47 -0400 Original-Received: from list by monty-python.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.10) id 17hhEw-0000n3-00 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 21 Aug 2002 21:58:26 -0400 Original-Received: from mail by monty-python.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.10) id 17hhES-0000eh-00 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 21 Aug 2002 21:58:25 -0400 Original-Received: from pele.santafe.edu ([192.12.12.119]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.10) id 17hhER-0000e0-00; Wed, 21 Aug 2002 21:57:56 -0400 Original-Received: from wijiji.santafe.edu (wijiji [192.12.12.5]) by pele.santafe.edu (8.11.6+Sun/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g7M1wH513844; Wed, 21 Aug 2002 19:58:17 -0600 (MDT) Original-Received: (from rms@localhost) by wijiji.santafe.edu (8.11.6+Sun/8.9.3) id g7M1vs110540; Wed, 21 Aug 2002 19:57:54 -0600 (MDT) X-Authentication-Warning: wijiji.santafe.edu: rms set sender to rms@wijiji using -f Original-To: monnier+gnu/emacs@rum.cs.yale.edu In-Reply-To: <200208211529.g7LFT5e24786@rum.cs.yale.edu> (monnier+gnu/emacs@rum.cs.yale.edu) Errors-To: emacs-devel-admin@gnu.org X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.11 Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: Emacs development discussions. List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:6747 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:6747 > For one thing, there are only a few modes you can control with the > menu bar, but there are dozens, maybe hundreds, you can control > with commands. Should all of them update your .emacs file? > Maybe they should, but that is a lot of change. AFAIK customize-mark-as-set does not itself update the .emacs file. It just marks the variable as "changed by customize" rather than "changed by some external thingy". It might indeed cause the variable to be saved later on if you custom-save-all. I don't know how important that is. Please excuse my inadequate memory. I see no possible harm in marking the variable as changed. So the question is simply whether we should try to change as many minor modes as possible, or only some of them, or none. If we succeed in changing most minor modes this way, but a few (perhaps user-implemented) remain unchanged, will the inconsistency be confusing, or will that be better than nothing?