From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Michael Heerdegen Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Is it valid to call isearch-filter-predicate outside isearch? Date: Fri, 02 Jun 2023 01:13:49 +0200 Message-ID: <87y1l2srma.fsf@web.de> References: <875y8nks9t.fsf@localhost> <87jzwo1462.fsf@web.de> <83cz2fenfs.fsf@gnu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="10541"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Cancel-Lock: sha1:IyuPSiRvKjDlFdfc4ayuSXrF+Ag= Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Fri Jun 02 01:14:46 2023 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 1q4rVF-0002UY-RX for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Fri, 02 Jun 2023 01:14:45 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1q4rUb-0000dh-Gf; Thu, 01 Jun 2023 19:14:05 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1q4rUZ-0000dH-Qt for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 01 Jun 2023 19:14:03 -0400 Original-Received: from ciao.gmane.io ([116.202.254.214]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1q4rUX-0005bs-8e for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 01 Jun 2023 19:14:03 -0400 Original-Received: from list by ciao.gmane.io with local (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1q4rUT-0001aS-Qw for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 02 Jun 2023 01:13:57 +0200 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: -13 X-Spam_score: -1.4 X-Spam_bar: - X-Spam_report: (-1.4 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN=0.248, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.249, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:306532 Archived-At: Eli Zaretskii writes: > > No. It has does have side effects that are not documented. > > The question is: why do we have to document every possible nit of the > internals? I still don't think I understand the rationale. People > who want to know _everything_ about the code should consult the source > code; it's the power of Free Software that they can do it. It would not harm in this marginal case, but keeping all such things up to date is probably beyond our capabilities. And to prevent this specific problem in Org would have required documenting a lot of more or less internal things. In this case it is indeed better to consult the code. Michael.