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: Mon, 12 Dec 2005 19:55:24 -0800 Message-ID: References: <200512130045.jBD0jnl08038@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 1134446198 20819 80.91.229.2 (13 Dec 2005 03:56:38 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 13 Dec 2005 03:56:38 +0000 (UTC) Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Dec 13 04:56:37 2005 Return-path: Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Em1GO-0007CG-1c for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 13 Dec 2005 04:55:40 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Em1Gu-0003ag-7d for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 12 Dec 2005 22:56:12 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1Em1Gj-0003ab-Pu for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 12 Dec 2005 22:56:01 -0500 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1Em1Gj-0003aB-8M for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 12 Dec 2005 22:56:01 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Em1Gj-0003a0-4I for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 12 Dec 2005 22:56:01 -0500 Original-Received: from [141.146.126.228] (helo=agminet01.oracle.com) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (TLS-1.0:DHE_RSA_3DES_EDE_CBC_SHA:24) (Exim 4.34) id 1Em1IY-0006fE-G4 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 12 Dec 2005 22:57:54 -0500 Original-Received: from rgmsgw300.us.oracle.com (rgmsgw300.us.oracle.com [138.1.186.49]) by agminet01.oracle.com (Switch-3.1.7/Switch-3.1.7) with ESMTP id jBD4DOtP018109 for ; Mon, 12 Dec 2005 22:13:25 -0600 Original-Received: from rgmsgw300.us.oracle.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by rgmsgw300.us.oracle.com (Switch-3.1.7/Switch-3.1.7) with ESMTP id jBD3tPEj011941 for ; Mon, 12 Dec 2005 20:55:25 -0700 Original-Received: from dradamslap (dhcp-amer-rmdc-csvpn-gw4-141-144-96-242.vpn.oracle.com [141.144.96.242]) by rgmsgw300.us.oracle.com (Switch-3.1.7/Switch-3.1.7) with SMTP id jBD3tP7Z011932 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5 bits=128 verify=NO) for ; Mon, 12 Dec 2005 20:55:25 -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: <200512130045.jBD0jnl08038@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 Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:47606 Archived-At: But current policy also shows non-customizable variables if you use the numeric arg. I have already told you: this is not a policy, but a way to _override_ a policy. The _default_ behavior (no numeric arg) is the policy. (If not, Richard can correct me.) Well, excuse me, but it is I who first used the term "current policy" in this context - what _I_ meant was "current behavior". Whether or not you or Richard considers the current numeric-argument behavior to be "the policy" is irrelevant to my meaning. The context of my use of the term "current policy" made it clear that I was referring to the numeric-argument behavior. I kept the numeric arg just so if anybody, for any reason whatsoever, had gotten used to it, they would still be able to use it (although I seriously doubt that this applies to a lot of people). That numeric argument is an *obscure unimportant detail*. Let us just stop worrying about it. Why you kept it is irrelevant at this point also - if the behavior exists, people can use it, and some will. _You_ went to the trouble of changing the doc strings to clarify this "*obscure unimportant detail*". Why did you bother? I, for one, am glad you did. I return to my original question: "Wouldn't it be at least as useful to be able to show all user options (i.e., including those that are not customizable) in a Custom buffer as it is to show _all_ variables in a Custom buffer (i.e., including those that a user should not change)? If we keep the current [behavior] of showing stuff that cannot be customized, then it would also be good to clearly indicate when a user option [is not a defcustom option] and when a variable is internal and should not be changed. That is, clearly distinguish the three classes in a Custom buffer. For "not customizable" and "cannot be customized", read "not defined with defcustom".