Re: master 513c5d827d: Use `format-prompt' in

[Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>]

> branch: master
> commit 513c5d827decf474f923f6f66abd2ed62e0e64f0
> Author: Robert Pluim <rpluim@gmail.com>
> Commit: Robert Pluim <rpluim@gmail.com>
> 
>     Use `format-prompt' in `describe-char-fold-equivalences'
>     
>     * lisp/char-fold.el (describe-char-fold-equivalences): Use `format-prompt'.
> ---
>  lisp/char-fold.el | 4 +++-
>  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/lisp/char-fold.el b/lisp/char-fold.el
> index 2ac4cb0543..43e3cd45ec 100644
> --- a/lisp/char-fold.el
> +++ b/lisp/char-fold.el
> @@ -439,7 +439,9 @@ non-nil, means also include partially matching ligatures and
>  non-canonical equivalences."
>    (interactive (list (ignore-errors
>                         (read-char-by-name
> -                        "Unicode name, single char, or hex, default all: " t))
> +                        (format-prompt "Unicode name, single char, or hex"
> +                                       "all")
> +                        t))

Thanks, but is this supposed to be an improvement?  Before the change,
I knew what the text meant and what was the "all" part about; after
the change, I don't.  It's a net loss, since the code is now less
readable, and in fact without either running the code or looking at
what format-prompt does, one cannot understand what the prompt will
say in Real Life.

And don't get me started about the problems this should cause if and
when we'd like to translate our prompts.

IMO, format-prompt is useful where it makes the code more clear, but
blindly using it everywhere is not TRT in the long run.