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: Re: read-buffer-function exists, read-file-name-function doesn't Date: 20 May 2002 00:24:17 +0200 Sender: emacs-devel-admin@gnu.org Message-ID: <5xznyvzsha.fsf@kfs2.cua.dk> References: NNTP-Posting-Host: localhost.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1021843435 31850 127.0.0.1 (19 May 2002 21:23:55 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 19 May 2002 21:23:55 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org Return-path: Original-Received: from quimby.gnus.org ([80.91.224.244]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1 (Debian)) id 179Y9j-0008Hb-00 for ; Sun, 19 May 2002 23:23:55 +0200 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([199.232.76.164]) by quimby.gnus.org with esmtp (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian)) id 179YNM-0002Yv-00 for ; Sun, 19 May 2002 23:38:01 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=fencepost.gnu.org) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 3.34 #1 (Debian)) id 179YA1-0002ha-00; Sun, 19 May 2002 17:24:13 -0400 Original-Received: from mail.filanet.dk ([195.215.206.179]) by fencepost.gnu.org with smtp (Exim 3.34 #1 (Debian)) id 179Y9P-0002eu-00 for ; Sun, 19 May 2002 17:23:35 -0400 Original-Received: from kfs2.cua.dk.cua.dk (unknown [10.1.82.3]) by mail.filanet.dk (Postfix) with SMTP id D88677C016; Sun, 19 May 2002 21:23:32 +0000 (GMT) Original-To: Eli Zaretskii In-Reply-To: Original-Lines: 17 User-Agent: Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.2.50 Errors-To: emacs-devel-admin@gnu.org X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.9 Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: Emacs development discussions. List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:4142 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:4142 Eli Zaretskii writes: > On 19 May 2002 storm@cua.dk wrote: > > > + RETURN_UNGCPRO (Ffuncall (6, args)); > > Why not use call6 instead? Actually, the code I wrote also included the READ-DIR argument I proposed, so I actually needed 7 arguments -- and there is no call7. The consensus now seems that we want something more generic than READ-DIR, so I'll work on that... -- Kim F. Storm http://www.cua.dk