From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: =?utf-8?Q?=C3=93scar_Fuentes?= Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: [External] : Re: command mode-specificity [was: scratch/command 064f146 1/2: Change...] Date: Thu, 18 Feb 2021 20:32:16 +0100 Message-ID: <87lfbl894v.fsf@telefonica.net> References: <83h7ma7k5y.fsf@gnu.org> <87tuqa1ogn.fsf@gnus.org> <83tuqa5ug7.fsf@gnu.org> <87eehdy5ie.fsf@gnus.org> <87tuq98gdl.fsf@telefonica.net> <87pn0x8f8l.fsf@telefonica.net> <87mtw1s1jk.fsf@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="7882"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/28.0.50 (gnu/linux) To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Cancel-Lock: sha1:oEoDcjL9XMW8Mqr9eNfbY/gXPrA= Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Thu Feb 18 21:02:57 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 1lCpVn-0001qP-Jx for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Thu, 18 Feb 2021 21:02:55 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:45476 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lCpVm-0001i7-KO for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Thu, 18 Feb 2021 15:02:54 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:36226) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lCp2G-0006NT-FX for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 18 Feb 2021 14:32:24 -0500 Original-Received: from ciao.gmane.io ([116.202.254.214]:39148) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lCp2E-0005cr-NI for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 18 Feb 2021 14:32:24 -0500 Original-Received: from list by ciao.gmane.io with local (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1lCp2C-0005ol-RE for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 18 Feb 2021 20:32:20 +0100 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ Received-SPF: pass client-ip=116.202.254.214; envelope-from=ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; helo=ciao.gmane.io X-Spam_score_int: -16 X-Spam_score: -1.7 X-Spam_bar: - X-Spam_report: (-1.7 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.249, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action 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:265185 Archived-At: Alan Mackenzie writes: > Hello, Robert. > > On Thu, Feb 18, 2021 at 18:55:59 +0100, Robert Pluim wrote: >> >>>>> On Thu, 18 Feb 2021 17:35:44 +0000, Alan Mackenzie said: > >> Alan> No, not from some other mode. We're talking about commands shared by a >> Alan> set of modes known only at runtime. If the list of modes cannot be >> Alan> updated at runtime, this is a deficiency in the design. > >> Iʼm having a hard time thinking of an example, eg you might not know >> which of the modes provided by the cc-mode package the user actually >> uses, but adding all of them to the relevant commands can be done >> beforehand. Can you expand? > > No, it can't be done. There is no list of "all" CC Mode packages. > They're largely created and distributed by third parties, i.e. they're > outside the orbit of Emacs development. There is no complete list of > them. AFAIR those modes derive from c-mode, right? It that is so, the commands are automatically applicable to them. > For this facility to be general, the list of modes MUST be changeable at > runtime. Why at runtime? (apart that compile-time and run-time is a somewhat diffuse distinction for Elisp) Can't the mode have declarations like thos I mentioned? But apart from that, I see no big problem about changing the list of modes at runtime, although I don't know the current implementation, so I hope someone else can clarify this.