From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Ted Zlatanov Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: next-error refactoring Date: Fri, 11 Jun 2004 14:39:29 -0400 Organization: =?utf-8?B?0KLQtdC+0LTQvtGAINCX0LvQsNGC0LDQvdC+0LI=?= @ Cienfuegos Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+emacs-devel=quimby.gnus.org@gnu.org Message-ID: <4n659yhrby.fsf@lifelogs.com> References: <20040503.071327.124836670.Takaaki.Ota@am.sony.com> <20040504.075437.207586641.Takaaki.Ota@am.sony.com> <87llk552oz.fsf@mail.jurta.org> <87isf6e7ji.fsf@mail.jurta.org> <87iseg4x5d.fsf@mail.jurta.org> <4npt8oeet9.fsf_-_@lifelogs.com> <4nd64j6u3p.fsf@lifelogs.com> <4n3c5c64mx.fsf@lifelogs.com> <4nhdtnqrek.fsf@lifelogs.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: deer.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1086980311 32208 80.91.224.253 (11 Jun 2004 18:58:31 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 11 Jun 2004 18:58:31 +0000 (UTC) Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+emacs-devel=quimby.gnus.org@gnu.org Fri Jun 11 20:58:14 2004 Return-path: Original-Received: from quimby.gnus.org ([80.91.224.244]) by deer.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 1BYrED-0006kg-00 for ; Fri, 11 Jun 2004 20:58:13 +0200 Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by quimby.gnus.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 1BYrEC-0001HS-00 for ; Fri, 11 Jun 2004 20:58:13 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1BYrEx-0001m9-58 for emacs-devel@quimby.gnus.org; Fri, 11 Jun 2004 14:58:59 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.33) id 1BYrEt-0001le-GV for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 11 Jun 2004 14:58:55 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.33) id 1BYrEs-0001lL-OX for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 11 Jun 2004 14:58:55 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1BYrEs-0001lB-Mc for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 11 Jun 2004 14:58:54 -0400 Original-Received: from [80.91.224.249] (helo=main.gmane.org) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1BYrDZ-0006F8-Bq for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 11 Jun 2004 14:57:33 -0400 Original-Received: from list by main.gmane.org with local (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 1BYrDY-0004yg-00 for ; Fri, 11 Jun 2004 20:57:32 +0200 Original-Received: from asimov.bwh.harvard.edu ([134.174.9.63]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Fri, 11 Jun 2004 20:57:32 +0200 Original-Received: from tzz by asimov.bwh.harvard.edu with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Fri, 11 Jun 2004 20:57:32 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ Original-To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-Lines: 30 Original-X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: asimov.bwh.harvard.edu X-Face: bd.DQ~'29fIs`T_%O%C\g%6jW)yi[zuz6; d4V0`@y-~$#3P_Ng{@m+e4o<4P'#(_GJQ%TT= D}[Ep*b!\e,fBZ'j_+#"Ps?s2!4H2-Y"sx" User-Agent: Gnus/5.110003 (No Gnus v0.3) Emacs/21.3.50 (gnu/linux) Cancel-Lock: sha1:v6RUsPMhOSuE1q6RtRueuwPQWNY= X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.4 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+emacs-devel=quimby.gnus.org@gnu.org Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:24843 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:24843 On Tue, 08 Jun 2004, rms@gnu.org wrote: > To use a single set of key bindings, defined in just one place, would > be desirable. I don't know whether it is possible. Making each of > these modes have good key bindings is the first priority. If it turns > out that a single set if bindings will work well for all of them, we > could easily write a subroutine to make those bindings in whatever > keymap. That would achieve the simplification you are looking for. > > The rest of the minor mode mechanism would be unnecessary, perhaps > even counterproductive. We certainly do not want it to appear *to the > user* as a separate minor mode. That would only be clutter, and suggest > to the user that he might want to consider turning the minor mode off, > which would always be a mistake. I see. That makes sense. As long as we can achieve the two goals of 1) a unified user interface 2) a simple API for developers to use next-error I'm happy without a minor mode, especially considering the reasons you mention against it. Has this (API to install keybindings) been done for another package, so I don't start from scratch? Thanks Ted