From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: scratch/command 064f146 1/2: Change command to interactive ... modes Date: Tue, 16 Feb 2021 21:39:31 +0200 Message-ID: <835z2r94zw.fsf@gnu.org> References: <20210213141225.11309.86562@vcs0.savannah.gnu.org> <87mtw6d480.fsf@gnus.org> <87eehid3k2.fsf@gnus.org> <87r1liblzb.fsf@gnus.org> <83y2fq9f0v.fsf@gnu.org> <87k0r8xl7y.fsf@gnus.org> <834kic9g0a.fsf@gnu.org> <8735xwvusc.fsf@gnus.org> <83v9as7xns.fsf@gnu.org> <87pn10ueld.fsf@gnus.org> <83r1lf9apm.fsf@gnu.org> <87a6s3vrnd.fsf@gnus.org> <83o8gj9a8o.fsf@gnu.org> <871rdfvq86.fsf@gnus.org> <83h7mb98g8.fsf@gnu.org> <87o8gjuaez.fsf@gnus.org> <83ft1v97bk.fsf@gnu.org> <877dn7u7wq.fsf@gnus.org> Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="18951"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: dgutov@yandex.ru, stefankangas@gmail.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Lars Ingebrigtsen Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Tue Feb 16 20:40:27 2021 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1lC6Cx-0004qL-GT for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Tue, 16 Feb 2021 20:40:27 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:58938 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lC6Cw-0007up-F7 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Tue, 16 Feb 2021 14:40:26 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:54360) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lC6Bx-0007Si-7s for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 16 Feb 2021 14:39:25 -0500 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]:59330) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lC6Bw-0008Sf-RP; Tue, 16 Feb 2021 14:39:24 -0500 Original-Received: from 84.94.185.95.cable.012.net.il ([84.94.185.95]:2008 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1lC6Bv-0003m6-Fp; Tue, 16 Feb 2021 14:39:24 -0500 In-Reply-To: <877dn7u7wq.fsf@gnus.org> (message from Lars Ingebrigtsen on Tue, 16 Feb 2021 20:31:01 +0100) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:264926 Archived-At: > From: Lars Ingebrigtsen > Cc: stefankangas@gmail.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org, dgutov@yandex.ru > Date: Tue, 16 Feb 2021 20:31:01 +0100 > > > Yes, I disagree that the former is not clear, easy, and maintainable. > > We've been using similar constructs for years. > > That's not quite a response to what I asked: Which one of those syntaxes > are clearer and easier? (To read and to write.) I find both to be of the same level of clarity and easiness of reading and writing. > I think it's clear that the new interactive spec leads to commands that > are easier to read and write than if (virtually all) commands need a > second (pretty obscure) incantation -- interactive/declare then works in > concert, and you have to understand both. I don't think an addition of a 'declare' form makes the function harder to read, no. Moreover, I believe many (most?) commands will remain unmarked, because they make sense in any mode. So I don't see any significant advantages in using 'interactive' for this purpose, but I do see disadvantages.