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: Current mode command discovery Date: Fri, 19 Feb 2021 15:40:47 +0200 Message-ID: <83h7m82n1c.fsf@gnu.org> References: <87v9aubm96.fsf@gnus.org> <87czwzfn9p.fsf@telefonica.net> <87eehfnd83.fsf@gnus.org> <1fb773f6-1480-53ce-08ae-1f7d0ba23428@yandex.ru> <87k0r637k4.fsf@gnus.org> <80e8c434-888d-23c5-13f0-c513bbf13ee4@yandex.ru> <8735xtznrh.fsf@gnus.org> <70fd2374-23ea-1c03-a4e4-97a370a41acf@yandex.ru> <87h7m9wjvl.fsf@gnus.org> <878s7kutzl.fsf@gnus.org> <83pn0w2qaf.fsf@gnu.org> <87zh00tevr.fsf@gnus.org> <83o8gg2pq9.fsf@gnu.org> <87ft1stdqp.fsf@gnus.org> Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="14232"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: ofv@wanadoo.es, dgutov@yandex.ru, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Lars Ingebrigtsen Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Fri Feb 19 14:44:49 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 1lD65R-0003Zu-AU for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Fri, 19 Feb 2021 14:44:49 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:36624 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lD65Q-0007lW-9K for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Fri, 19 Feb 2021 08:44:48 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:46620) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lD61N-0004HB-0C for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 19 Feb 2021 08:40:37 -0500 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]:47315) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lD61L-0000TC-Lv; Fri, 19 Feb 2021 08:40:35 -0500 Original-Received: from 84.94.185.95.cable.012.net.il ([84.94.185.95]:2415 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1lD61K-0002jv-Rd; Fri, 19 Feb 2021 08:40:35 -0500 In-Reply-To: <87ft1stdqp.fsf@gnus.org> (message from Lars Ingebrigtsen on Fri, 19 Feb 2021 13:59:26 +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:265250 Archived-At: > From: Lars Ingebrigtsen > Date: Fri, 19 Feb 2021 13:59:26 +0100 > Cc: ofv@wanadoo.es, emacs-devel@gnu.org, dgutov@yandex.ru > > Eli Zaretskii writes: > > > What I mean is this: we do sometimes mark mode-specific commands as > > autoloaded, for the reason I explained. Unlike what you said, which > > is that most things that we autoload are NOT mode-specific. > > I think you're just saying the same thing I did? I said that most > commands that are ;;;###autoloaded aren't mode-specific. You say that > some ;;;###autoloaded commands are mode-specific. > > I think we're in violent agreement here, unless you somehow interpret > "most" as being "all". Unless "most" means 95% percent or so, and we can disregard the remaining 5%, how is it useful to know that "most" autoloaded commands are not mode-specific? We will need to handle both those that are and those that aren't, so the fact that commands that are mode-specific and yet are autoloaded are a minority doesn't help, does it?