From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: storm@cua.dk (Kim F. Storm) Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Misc. minor compile.el issues Date: 06 Dec 2002 01:34:58 +0100 Sender: emacs-devel-admin@gnu.org Message-ID: <5xn0nkasst.fsf@kfs2.cua.dk> NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1039131932 30084 80.91.224.249 (5 Dec 2002 23:45:32 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 5 Dec 2002 23:45:32 +0000 (UTC) Return-path: Original-Received: from quimby.gnus.org ([80.91.224.244]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 18K5gO-0007oo-00 for ; Fri, 06 Dec 2002 00:45:28 +0100 Original-Received: from monty-python.gnu.org ([199.232.76.173]) by quimby.gnus.org with esmtp (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian)) id 18K5ok-0008MC-00 for ; Fri, 06 Dec 2002 00:54:06 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.10.13) id 18K5aH-0006PH-00; Thu, 05 Dec 2002 18:39:09 -0500 Original-Received: from list by monty-python.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.10.13) id 18K5Zx-0006Cb-00 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 05 Dec 2002 18:38:49 -0500 Original-Received: from mail by monty-python.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.10.13) id 18K5Wf-0003mp-00 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 05 Dec 2002 18:35:56 -0500 Original-Received: from mail.filanet.dk ([195.215.206.179]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.10.13) id 18K5We-0003Q3-00 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 05 Dec 2002 18:35:24 -0500 Original-Received: from kfs2.cua.dk.cua.dk (unknown [10.1.82.3]) by mail.filanet.dk (Postfix) with SMTP id 6FEE87C017 for ; Thu, 5 Dec 2002 23:35:14 +0000 (GMT) Original-To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-Lines: 41 User-Agent: Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.3.50 Errors-To: emacs-devel-admin@gnu.org X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.11 Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: Emacs development discussions. List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:9910 The doc string for compilation-process-setup-function starts with a `*' identifying it as a user option. Does that really make sense? IMO, it is similar to compilation-buffer-name-function which is not a user option. Related to this, I would like the setup function to be able to access the buffer and/or window for the compilation process (e.g. to set buffer-local variables). Currently, this can be achieved by accessing the dynamic bound variables `outbuf' and `outwin' from the setup function, but that seems like a gross hack. It would make more sense to provide `outwin' as argument to the setup function, but that would break existing code. Alternatively, we could dynamically bind `compilation-window' and `compilation-buffer' around the call to the setup function (and document this "interface" in the compilation-process-setup-function doc string). This is still a hack, but using well-defined names. As a final issue, I think that although the documentation for compilation-process-setup-function says it is run just before the process is started, it makes more sense to swap the following two forms, to allow the setup function to control the compilation-window-height: (compilation-set-window-height outwin) (if compilation-process-setup-function (funcall compilation-process-setup-function)) In any case, I don't see any ill effects of swapping them. -- Kim F. Storm http://www.cua.dk