* Why the odd interactive form in byte-compile-file?
@ 2014-01-13 4:17 Daniel Colascione
2014-01-15 0:00 ` Daniel Colascione
0 siblings, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread
From: Daniel Colascione @ 2014-01-13 4:17 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Emacs developers
byte-compile-file begins with this interactive spec:
(interactive
(let ((file buffer-file-name)
(file-name nil)
(file-dir nil))
(and file
(derived-mode-p 'emacs-lisp-mode)
(setq file-name (file-name-nondirectory file)
file-dir (file-name-directory file)))
(list (read-file-name (if current-prefix-arg
"Byte compile and load file: "
"Byte compile file: "))
current-prefix-arg)))
Why do we go to the trouble of splitting the file name when we're in an
emacs-lisp-mode buffer? If I'm editing /foo/bar/qux.el and type M-x
byte-compile-file RET, this code has the effect of compiling qux.el and
putting "qux.el" in file-name-history, not "/foo/bar/qux.el". Now, if
default-history is something else and I use C-x C-f C-r qux, I'll end up
on a bare "qux.el" instead of something I can actually use in another
context.
Is there some deeper reason we're not using code that looks like this?
(interactive
(list (read-file-name (if current-prefix-arg
"Byte compile and load file: "
"Byte compile file: "))
current-prefix-arg))
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread* Re: Why the odd interactive form in byte-compile-file?
2014-01-13 4:17 Why the odd interactive form in byte-compile-file? Daniel Colascione
@ 2014-01-15 0:00 ` Daniel Colascione
2014-01-15 4:41 ` Thien-Thi Nguyen
0 siblings, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread
From: Daniel Colascione @ 2014-01-15 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Emacs developers
On 01/12/2014 08:17 PM, Daniel Colascione wrote:
> byte-compile-file begins with this interactive spec:
>
> (interactive
> (let ((file buffer-file-name)
> (file-name nil)
> (file-dir nil))
> (and file
> (derived-mode-p 'emacs-lisp-mode)
> (setq file-name (file-name-nondirectory file)
> file-dir (file-name-directory file)))
> (list (read-file-name (if current-prefix-arg
> "Byte compile and load file: "
> "Byte compile file: "))
> current-prefix-arg)))
>
> Why do we go to the trouble of splitting the file name when we're in an
> emacs-lisp-mode buffer? If I'm editing /foo/bar/qux.el and type M-x
> byte-compile-file RET, this code has the effect of compiling qux.el and
> putting "qux.el" in file-name-history, not "/foo/bar/qux.el". Now, if
> default-history is something else and I use C-x C-f C-r qux, I'll end up
> on a bare "qux.el" instead of something I can actually use in another
> context.
>
> Is there some deeper reason we're not using code that looks like this?
>
> (interactive
> (list (read-file-name (if current-prefix-arg
> "Byte compile and load file: "
> "Byte compile file: "))
> current-prefix-arg))
Ping? I'd like to treat this issue as a bugfix and change the
interactive form to my proposal for 24.4.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: Why the odd interactive form in byte-compile-file?
2014-01-15 0:00 ` Daniel Colascione
@ 2014-01-15 4:41 ` Thien-Thi Nguyen
2014-01-15 4:43 ` Daniel Colascione
0 siblings, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread
From: Thien-Thi Nguyen @ 2014-01-15 4:41 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Daniel Colascione; +Cc: Emacs developers
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1038 bytes --]
() Daniel Colascione <dancol@dancol.org>
() Tue, 14 Jan 2014 16:00:02 -0800
> Is there some deeper reason we're not using code that looks like this?
>
> (interactive
> (list (read-file-name (if current-prefix-arg
> "Byte compile and load file: "
> "Byte compile file: "))
> current-prefix-arg))
The current ‘interactive’ form supplies DIR and DEFAULT-FILENAME args to
‘read-file-name’ if the current buffer is Emacs Lisp (ish). Those are
available to the user via ‘M-n’.
The form you propose doesn't do that.
Ping? I'd like to treat this issue as a bugfix and change the
interactive form to my proposal for 24.4.
Why do you want to treat this functionality as an "issue"?
--
Thien-Thi Nguyen
GPG key: 4C807502
(if you're human and you know it)
read my lisp: (responsep (questions 'technical)
(not (via 'mailing-list)))
=> nil
[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 197 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread* Re: Why the odd interactive form in byte-compile-file?
2014-01-15 4:41 ` Thien-Thi Nguyen
@ 2014-01-15 4:43 ` Daniel Colascione
2014-01-15 14:46 ` Stefan Monnier
0 siblings, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread
From: Daniel Colascione @ 2014-01-15 4:43 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Thien-Thi Nguyen; +Cc: Emacs developers
On 01/14/2014 08:41 PM, Thien-Thi Nguyen wrote:
> () Daniel Colascione <dancol@dancol.org>
> () Tue, 14 Jan 2014 16:00:02 -0800
>
> > Is there some deeper reason we're not using code that looks like this?
> >
> > (interactive
> > (list (read-file-name (if current-prefix-arg
> > "Byte compile and load file: "
> > "Byte compile file: "))
> > current-prefix-arg))
>
> The current ‘interactive’ form supplies DIR and DEFAULT-FILENAME args to
> ‘read-file-name’ if the current buffer is Emacs Lisp (ish). Those are
> available to the user via ‘M-n’.
Why is that useful?
> The form you propose doesn't do that.
>
> Ping? I'd like to treat this issue as a bugfix and change the
> interactive form to my proposal for 24.4.
>
> Why do you want to treat this functionality as an "issue"?
The current interactive form results in filenames without paths being
left in file-name-history when accepting the default filename with RET.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: Why the odd interactive form in byte-compile-file?
2014-01-15 4:43 ` Daniel Colascione
@ 2014-01-15 14:46 ` Stefan Monnier
2014-01-15 19:10 ` Daniel Colascione
0 siblings, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread
From: Stefan Monnier @ 2014-01-15 14:46 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Daniel Colascione; +Cc: Thien-Thi Nguyen, Emacs developers
>> > Is there some deeper reason we're not using code that looks like this?
>> > (interactive
>> > (list (read-file-name (if current-prefix-arg
>> > "Byte compile and load file: "
>> > "Byte compile file: "))
>> > current-prefix-arg))
>> The current ‘interactive’ form supplies DIR and DEFAULT-FILENAME args to
>> ‘read-file-name’ if the current buffer is Emacs Lisp (ish). Those are
>> available to the user via ‘M-n’.
> Why is that useful?
Because you can compile the current buffer's file by just hitting RET.
> The current interactive form results in filenames without paths being left
> in file-name-history when accepting the default filename with RET.
Yes, that's a bug. We shouldn't pass "file-name" to read-file-name
but buffer-file-name instead.
Stefan
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread* Re: Why the odd interactive form in byte-compile-file?
2014-01-15 14:46 ` Stefan Monnier
@ 2014-01-15 19:10 ` Daniel Colascione
2014-01-15 23:47 ` Stefan Monnier
0 siblings, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread
From: Daniel Colascione @ 2014-01-15 19:10 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Stefan Monnier; +Cc: Thien-Thi Nguyen, Emacs developers
On 01/15/2014 06:46 AM, Stefan Monnier wrote:
>>>> Is there some deeper reason we're not using code that looks like this?
>>>> (interactive
>>>> (list (read-file-name (if current-prefix-arg
>>>> "Byte compile and load file: "
>>>> "Byte compile file: "))
>>>> current-prefix-arg))
>>> The current ‘interactive’ form supplies DIR and DEFAULT-FILENAME args to
>>> ‘read-file-name’ if the current buffer is Emacs Lisp (ish). Those are
>>> available to the user via ‘M-n’.
>> Why is that useful?
>
> Because you can compile the current buffer's file by just hitting RET.
Sure, but that also works without the file-dir and file-name parameters
being passed at all.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: Why the odd interactive form in byte-compile-file?
2014-01-15 19:10 ` Daniel Colascione
@ 2014-01-15 23:47 ` Stefan Monnier
2014-01-15 23:49 ` Daniel Colascione
0 siblings, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread
From: Stefan Monnier @ 2014-01-15 23:47 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Daniel Colascione; +Cc: Thien-Thi Nguyen, Emacs developers
>>>>> Is there some deeper reason we're not using code that looks like this?
>>>>> (interactive
>>>>> (list (read-file-name (if current-prefix-arg
>>>>> "Byte compile and load file: "
>>>>> "Byte compile file: "))
>>>>> current-prefix-arg))
>>>> The current ‘interactive’ form supplies DIR and DEFAULT-FILENAME args to
>>>> ‘read-file-name’ if the current buffer is Emacs Lisp (ish). Those are
>>>> available to the user via ‘M-n’.
>>> Why is that useful?
>> Because you can compile the current buffer's file by just hitting RET.
> Sure, but that also works without the file-dir and file-name parameters
> being passed at all.
I suggest to replace file-name with buffer-file-name for now (since it
fixes a bug), and to install your simpler code after we re-open the
trunk for non-bugfix changes.
Stefan
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread* Re: Why the odd interactive form in byte-compile-file?
2014-01-15 23:47 ` Stefan Monnier
@ 2014-01-15 23:49 ` Daniel Colascione
0 siblings, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: Daniel Colascione @ 2014-01-15 23:49 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Stefan Monnier; +Cc: Thien-Thi Nguyen, Emacs developers
On 01/15/2014 03:47 PM, Stefan Monnier wrote:
>>>>>> Is there some deeper reason we're not using code that looks like this?
>>>>>> (interactive
>>>>>> (list (read-file-name (if current-prefix-arg
>>>>>> "Byte compile and load file:"
>>>>>> "Byte compile file: "))
>>>>>> current-prefix-arg))
>>>>> The current ‘interactive’ form supplies DIR and DEFAULT-FILENAME args to
>>>>> ‘read-file-name’ if the current buffer is Emacs Lisp (ish). Those are
>>>>> available to the user via ‘M-n’.
>>>> Why is that useful?
>>> Because you can compile the current buffer's file by just hitting RET.
>> Sure, but that also works without the file-dir and file-name parameters
>> being passed at all.
>
> I suggest to replace file-name with buffer-file-name for now (since it
> fixes a bug), and to install your simpler code after we re-open the
> trunk for non-bugfix changes.
Thanks. Done.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2014-01-15 23:49 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2014-01-13 4:17 Why the odd interactive form in byte-compile-file? Daniel Colascione
2014-01-15 0:00 ` Daniel Colascione
2014-01-15 4:41 ` Thien-Thi Nguyen
2014-01-15 4:43 ` Daniel Colascione
2014-01-15 14:46 ` Stefan Monnier
2014-01-15 19:10 ` Daniel Colascione
2014-01-15 23:47 ` Stefan Monnier
2014-01-15 23:49 ` Daniel Colascione
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this public inbox
https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/emacs.git
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).