Re: customize-mark-as-set for M-x foo-mode

["Stefan Monnier" <monnier+gnu/emacs@rum.cs.yale.edu>]

>     > 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.

Indeed.  I obviously think that "as many as possible" is the right answer.

> 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?

There are already many inconsistencies in the various hand-crafted
minor-modes: lack of minor-mode hook, omission of (force-mode-line-update),
"wrong" return value, lack of minibuffer message, lack of optional argument,
unnecessary requirement that there be an argument, ...

Also why should `Options => Show => Tool Bar' change my customize
settings but not M-x tool-bar-mode ?  That doesn't seem consistent
since the two do just the same (it seems).

Obviously, I also agree that we should try to switch as many minor
modes over to the wonders of `define-minor-mode'.



	Stefan