From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail
From: "Richard M. Stallman" <rms@gnu.org>
Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel
Subject: Re: wrapper fn for message and minibuffer-message?
Date: Thu, 06 Oct 2005 23:04:19 -0400
Message-ID: <E1ENiWx-00026w-Gt@fencepost.gnu.org>
References: <DNEMKBNJBGPAOPIJOOICEEBICNAA.drew.adams@oracle.com>
Reply-To: rms@gnu.org
NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15
X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1128654328 3134 80.91.229.2 (7 Oct 2005 03:05:28 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org
NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 7 Oct 2005 03:05:28 +0000 (UTC)
Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org
Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Oct 07 05:05:19 2005
Return-path: <emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>
Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165])
	by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43)
	id 1ENiXB-0004KP-2A
	for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 07 Oct 2005 05:04:33 +0200
Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43)
	id 1ENiXA-0007yj-H1
	for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 06 Oct 2005 23:04:32 -0400
Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1ENiX1-0007xR-Lt
	for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 06 Oct 2005 23:04:23 -0400
Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1ENiX1-0007wk-1u
	for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 06 Oct 2005 23:04:23 -0400
Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1ENiWy-0007wa-UK
	for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 06 Oct 2005 23:04:22 -0400
Original-Received: from [199.232.76.164] (helo=fencepost.gnu.org)
	by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1ENiWy-0002h0-6U
	for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 06 Oct 2005 23:04:20 -0400
Original-Received: from rms by fencepost.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.34)
	id 1ENiWx-00026w-Gt; Thu, 06 Oct 2005 23:04:19 -0400
Original-To: "Drew Adams" <drew.adams@oracle.com>
In-reply-to: <DNEMKBNJBGPAOPIJOOICEEBICNAA.drew.adams@oracle.com>
X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." <emacs-devel.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-devel>,
	<mailto:emacs-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/pipermail/emacs-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:emacs-devel@gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:emacs-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-devel>,
	<mailto:emacs-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=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:43628
Archived-At: <http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel/43628>

    Not sure I understand. The important differences between `message' and
    `minibuffer-message' today are these:

     - `message' exits the minibuffer (and recursive edit);
       `minibuffer-message' does not

No it doesn't.

     - `message' logs the message to *Messages*;
       `minibuffer-message' does not

That is probably a bug.

     - `minibuffer-message' wraps the message in "  [...]";
       `message' does not

That's just a matter of how to make it stand out at the end of
the minibuffer.