From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "Drew Adams" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: RE: customize-apropos Date: Tue, 13 Dec 2005 19:52:19 -0800 Message-ID: References: <200512140340.jBE3erw17431@raven.dms.auburn.edu> NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1134532431 31650 80.91.229.2 (14 Dec 2005 03:53:51 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 14 Dec 2005 03:53:51 +0000 (UTC) Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Dec 14 04:53:40 2005 Return-path: Original-Received: from [199.232.75.2] (helo=lists.gnu.org) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1EmNgy-00039F-G3 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 14 Dec 2005 04:52:36 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1EmNhX-0003s6-Ly for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 13 Dec 2005 22:53:11 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1EmNhO-0003rn-V3 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 13 Dec 2005 22:53:03 -0500 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1EmNhN-0003rb-GV for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 13 Dec 2005 22:53:02 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1EmNhN-0003rY-EB for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 13 Dec 2005 22:53:01 -0500 Original-Received: from [148.87.122.30] (helo=rgminet01.oracle.com) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (TLS-1.0:DHE_RSA_3DES_EDE_CBC_SHA:24) (Exim 4.34) id 1EmNjN-0005l3-LJ for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 13 Dec 2005 22:55:05 -0500 Original-Received: from rgmsgw301.us.oracle.com (rgmsgw301.us.oracle.com [138.1.186.50]) by rgminet01.oracle.com (Switch-3.1.6/Switch-3.1.6) with ESMTP id jBE3qMOL001997 for ; Tue, 13 Dec 2005 20:52:22 -0700 Original-Received: from rgmsgw301.us.oracle.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by rgmsgw301.us.oracle.com (Switch-3.1.7/Switch-3.1.7) with ESMTP id jBE3qMcj031137 for ; Tue, 13 Dec 2005 20:52:22 -0700 Original-Received: from dradamslap (dhcp-amer-rmdc-csvpn-gw5-141-144-106-118.vpn.oracle.com [141.144.106.118]) by rgmsgw301.us.oracle.com (Switch-3.1.7/Switch-3.1.7) with SMTP id jBE3qKJW031128 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5 bits=128 verify=NO) for ; Tue, 13 Dec 2005 20:52:21 -0700 Original-To: X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.6604 (9.0.2911.0) In-Reply-To: <200512140340.jBE3erw17431@raven.dms.auburn.edu> Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1506 X-Brightmail-Tracker: AAAAAQAAAAI= X-Whitelist: TRUE 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: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org X-Broken-Reverse-DNS: no host name found for IP address 199.232.75.2 Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:47673 Archived-At: This message is shown if someone does `C-u M-x customize-apropos' - that's what we're discussing, right? Yes. Actually, it is shown in four situations: 1. As a result of a bug in some code. (This is by far the most likely situation) 2. If somebody uses C-M-c in the minibuffer (RET or C-j will not work) to get around the minibuffer completion functions which are designed to prevent such variables from being shown in a Custom buffer, unless the user is savvy enough to know how to override these completion functions. 3. If the user calls M-x customize-variable or friends from Lisp instead of interactively, again in an attempt to override the completion functions. 4. If somebody uses an obscure numeric arg, meant for expert users, to customize-apropos. These are all marginal situations. We are talking about some very marginal aspect of Custom here, that is only going to be used _intentionally_ by experts. Using a documented `C-u' with a standard command is not some bizarre expert behavior. If this is not intended for users, then let's get rid of the `C-u' option. I vote to keep it and clarify the Custom-buffer messages accordingly, but if people think this `C-u' behavior is something for experts only, then let's get rid of it. The other cases might well correspond to a message such as you have provided. It's unfortunate to lump together a message that responds to obscure bugs ("the most likely situation") with a message that responds to a user's `C-u'.