From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Alan Mackenzie Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: yes-or-no-p prompt conditionally broken in master? Date: Fri, 4 Sep 2015 18:36:46 +0000 Message-ID: <20150904183646.GD2991@acm.fritz.box> References: <57355235-9af7-49fb-81b5-93182cfc9d49@default> <83a8t39x3t.fsf@gnu.org> <83zj128slp.fsf@gnu.org> <87k2s6o7qh.fsf@igel.home> <83wpw68j2n.fsf@gnu.org> <871teenysf.fsf@igel.home> <83r3me8ho3.fsf@gnu.org> <20150904133439.GB2991@acm.fritz.box> <83lhcm83vl.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1441391777 32753 80.91.229.3 (4 Sep 2015 18:36:17 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 4 Sep 2015 18:36:17 +0000 (UTC) Cc: kaushal.modi@gmail.com, bruce.connor.am@gmail.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org, schwab@linux-m68k.org, monnier@iro.umontreal.ca, dgutov@yandex.ru, drew.adams@oracle.com To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Sep 04 20:36:08 2015 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1ZXvqH-0001xb-Px for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 04 Sep 2015 20:36:05 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:34280 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZXvqH-0007at-N8 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 04 Sep 2015 14:36:05 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:38178) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZXvpw-0007L0-HS for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 04 Sep 2015 14:35:45 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZXvpt-0005ka-F3 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 04 Sep 2015 14:35:44 -0400 Original-Received: from mail.muc.de ([193.149.48.3]:64502) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZXvpt-0005jA-65 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 04 Sep 2015 14:35:41 -0400 Original-Received: (qmail 17980 invoked by uid 3782); 4 Sep 2015 18:35:40 -0000 Original-Received: from acm.muc.de (p5B1476D3.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [91.20.118.211]) by colin.muc.de (tmda-ofmipd) with ESMTP; Fri, 04 Sep 2015 20:35:37 +0200 Original-Received: (qmail 6533 invoked by uid 1000); 4 Sep 2015 18:36:46 -0000 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <83lhcm83vl.fsf@gnu.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) X-Delivery-Agent: TMDA/1.1.12 (Macallan) X-Primary-Address: acm@muc.de X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: FreeBSD 9.x X-Received-From: 193.149.48.3 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:189610 Archived-At: Hello, Eli. On Fri, Sep 04, 2015 at 08:56:46PM +0300, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > > Date: Fri, 4 Sep 2015 13:34:39 +0000 > > Cc: Andreas Schwab , kaushal.modi@gmail.com, > > bruce.connor.am@gmail.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org, monnier@iro.umontreal.ca, > > dgutov@yandex.ru, drew.adams@oracle.com > > From: Alan Mackenzie [ .... ] > > If the defcustom has three values "Always-y-or-n", "Always-yes-or-no", > > "depends-on-the-particular-invocation", I'm fine. With just the first > > two alternatives, I wouldn't like it. > The intent is to provide a predicate defcustom that allows to cause > yes-or-no-p behave like y-or-n-p. y-or-n-p will always behave as it > does, and I didn't intend to change that, as I don't see the use case > for that. > If you still want the 3rd alternative, please describe the use cases > that would need it. No, I don't. I thought somebody else did. There's been a fair amount of misunderstanding in this thread. Sorry for adding to it. > > I'm wondering whether coalescing these two function is more trouble than > > it's worth. > Please don't worry about the implementation aspects. It's not rocket > science in any case. OK. Have a good weekend! -- Alan Mackenzie (Nuremberg, Germany).