From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Stefan Monnier Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: how-many/count-matches for non-interactive use Date: Sun, 17 Oct 2004 11:19:42 -0400 Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Message-ID: <87is99nznd.fsf-monnier+emacs@gnu.org> References: <87pt3m5vqk.fsf@oak.pohoyda.family> <87zn2mh5jk.fsf-monnier+emacs@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: deer.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1098026405 2625 80.91.229.6 (17 Oct 2004 15:20:05 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 17 Oct 2004 15:20:05 +0000 (UTC) Cc: rms@gnu.org, alexander.pohoyda@gmx.net, emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sun Oct 17 17:19:57 2004 Return-path: Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by deer.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 1CJCpA-0002vH-00 for ; Sun, 17 Oct 2004 17:19:57 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1CJCwP-0003PT-CD for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 17 Oct 2004 11:27:25 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.33) id 1CJCwJ-0003PO-RU for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 17 Oct 2004 11:27:19 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.33) id 1CJCwJ-0003PC-G0 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 17 Oct 2004 11:27:19 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1CJCwJ-0003P9-CW for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 17 Oct 2004 11:27:19 -0400 Original-Received: from [209.226.175.74] (helo=tomts20-srv.bellnexxia.net) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1CJCox-0005nP-1I; Sun, 17 Oct 2004 11:19:43 -0400 Original-Received: from alfajor ([67.71.117.80]) by tomts20-srv.bellnexxia.net (InterMail vM.5.01.06.10 201-253-122-130-110-20040306) with ESMTP id <20041017151942.RVCU25820.tomts20-srv.bellnexxia.net@alfajor>; Sun, 17 Oct 2004 11:19:42 -0400 Original-Received: by alfajor (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 16597D7363; Sun, 17 Oct 2004 11:19:42 -0400 (EDT) Original-To: storm@cua.dk (Kim F. Storm) In-Reply-To: (Kim F. Storm's message of "Sun, 17 Oct 2004 00:00:15 +0200") User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/21.3.50 (gnu/linux) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 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.org@gnu.org Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:28507 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:28507 > Thinking more about it, I belive that the current behaviour of > interactive-p makes good sense in cases where it is used to determine > whether a command should do sit-for or output a message, as those are > typically not desireable during macro execution. Sit-for doesn't wait when executed from a macro. As for messages you might be right in some (maybe even in many) cases but I doubt it matters much since unless the message is the last in the macro it will just be overwritten anyway. Stefan