From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "Ken Manheimer" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: allout patch - more safe-local-variables, plus autoloads Date: Fri, 21 Apr 2006 11:39:13 -0400 Message-ID: <2cd46e7f0604210839q4597d83aied8b4251ea761a70@mail.gmail.com> References: <2cd46e7f0604171211s5ef0e820gebc4e68b2ce2606d@mail.gmail.com> <8764l7m40w.fsf-monnier+emacs@gnu.org> <87r73uji3b.fsf-monnier+emacs@gnu.org> <87u08oqhq3.fsf-monnier+emacs@gnu.org> <2cd46e7f0604210802t28837d4r7aef3d3231a26ea3@mail.gmail.com> <85mzefoti5.fsf@lola.goethe.zz> NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1145633989 9165 80.91.229.2 (21 Apr 2006 15:39:49 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 21 Apr 2006 15:39:49 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org, Stefan Monnier , rms@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Apr 21 17:39:47 2006 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1FWxjH-0000U0-KQ for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 21 Apr 2006 17:39:32 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1FWxjG-0005Oh-DM for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 21 Apr 2006 11:39:30 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1FWxj4-0005OD-7K for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 21 Apr 2006 11:39:18 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1FWxj1-0005Ny-I2 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 21 Apr 2006 11:39:16 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1FWxj1-0005Nu-Eg for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 21 Apr 2006 11:39:15 -0400 Original-Received: from [64.233.182.189] (helo=nproxy.gmail.com) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.52) id 1FWxkb-0000Ij-Ah for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 21 Apr 2006 11:40:53 -0400 Original-Received: by nproxy.gmail.com with SMTP id i2so388239nfe for ; Fri, 21 Apr 2006 08:39:14 -0700 (PDT) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=EKA9nrNN5H9ac/hwO+Y5QNRSFDI+MXVshiFZMwlvrvLRYRph96awtvMoy4XcI0ZAWLTQxbM8erymJWxe0dmYDEfRJh4nTqErcR7syW4Ev6qRFxOSU+IQCsLNd8YgeFzFlPIHCW218Xd3rgs5YlusbAUNoIXsWows36Dj0QuuT5c= Original-Received: by 10.48.4.6 with SMTP id 6mr1430819nfd; Fri, 21 Apr 2006 08:39:14 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: by 10.49.51.17 with HTTP; Fri, 21 Apr 2006 08:39:13 -0700 (PDT) Original-To: "David Kastrup" In-Reply-To: <85mzefoti5.fsf@lola.goethe.zz> Content-Disposition: inline X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:53195 Archived-At: On 4/21/06, David Kastrup wrote: > "Ken Manheimer" writes: > > > in many cases, the qualifying criteria is already present, in the form > > of the custom-type information: > > > > seems to me we're heading down the road of duplicating the mechanisms > > of the custom type system, and that we should be using it. i strongly > > suspect that the custom types of customizable variables are > > appropriate as safety criteria in many cases, as well. we wouldn't > > want to assume that, but i suspect it would be very useful to make it > > easy for authors to use the custom-type criteria for this purpose. > > I don't see that. If a variable can be dangerous, I think it very > unlikely that all uses conforming to its customization type would be > harmless. why not? seems to me that the customization criteria are in substantial part about safety - a good author is preventing their users from shooting themselves in the foot with problematic custom values. the only difference is that less attention is likely to be paid to users who are deviously *trying* to blow their foot off.-) (i wonder how often current safety tests exceed their variable's customization tests, when present? i suspect not many.) the crucial thing is that the safety criteria should never *conflict* with the customization criteria, and in fact, should always obtain for it. it may be that people need to be thinking more stringently about their customization criteria, but the safety concerns apply there as much as anywhere. i could be wrong here - counter examples welcome. for what it's worth, it happens to work quite nicely for allout's variables. -- ken manheimer ken.manheimer@gmail.com http://myriadicity.net