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 14:42:38 +0200 Message-ID: <83o8gg2pq9.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> Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="25112"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: ofv@wanadoo.es, emacs-devel@gnu.org, dgutov@yandex.ru To: Lars Ingebrigtsen Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Fri Feb 19 13:43:58 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 1lD58Y-0006RV-92 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Fri, 19 Feb 2021 13:43:58 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:37992 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lD58X-0007Tl-9e for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Fri, 19 Feb 2021 07:43:57 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:32912) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lD573-000614-Cc for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 19 Feb 2021 07:42:25 -0500 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]:43050) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lD572-0000mq-1L; Fri, 19 Feb 2021 07:42:24 -0500 Original-Received: from 84.94.185.95.cable.012.net.il ([84.94.185.95]:2815 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1lD571-0001No-Ct; Fri, 19 Feb 2021 07:42:23 -0500 In-Reply-To: <87zh00tevr.fsf@gnus.org> (message from Lars Ingebrigtsen on Fri, 19 Feb 2021 13:34:48 +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:265235 Archived-At: > From: Lars Ingebrigtsen > Cc: dgutov@yandex.ru, ofv@wanadoo.es, emacs-devel@gnu.org > Date: Fri, 19 Feb 2021 13:34:48 +0100 > > Eli Zaretskii writes: > > >> However, this may be a smaller issue than you'd think. Most things that > >> are tagged as ;;;###autoload won't be mode-specific: They are > >> autoloadable exactly because they can be called from anywhere in Emacs. > > > > That's not necessarily true. We also use ;;;###autoload as the means > > to load a mode when some command is invoked. > > I'm not quite sure what you're mean here? 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. > We use ;;;###autoload on functions that aren't commands; yes. But a > (major) mode can't (by definition) be a mode-specific command. I don't see how this is relevant.