From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Richard Stallman Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: position on changing defaults? Date: Thu, 13 Mar 2008 18:24:26 -0400 Message-ID: References: <200803050637.m256bXL3008361@sallyv1.ics.uci.edu> <87hcfkdhqk.fsf@stupidchicken.com> <87pru8enjx.fsf@kfs-lx.rd.rdm> <8763vy95a6.fsf@kfs-lx.rd.rdm> <87wsoc39i8.fsf@catnip.gol.com> <877igb7dsi.fsf@kfs-lx.rd.rdm> <87hcff5upc.fsf@kfs-lx.rd.rdm> <87fxuxsg3m.fsf@kfs-lx.rd.rdm> <87r6egp8oo.fsf@kfs-lx.rd.rdm> <47D86DC6.4080805@gmail.com> Reply-To: rms@gnu.org NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15 X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1205447226 15549 80.91.229.12 (13 Mar 2008 22:27:06 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 13 Mar 2008 22:27:06 +0000 (UTC) Cc: cyd@stupidchicken.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org, monnier@iro.umontreal.ca, storm@cua.dk, miles@gnu.org To: "Lennart Borgman (gmail)" Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu Mar 13 23:27:33 2008 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1JZvtc-0002GY-FL for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 13 Mar 2008 23:27:32 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JZvt3-000332-24 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 13 Mar 2008 18:26:57 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1JZvqg-0000qP-JQ for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 13 Mar 2008 18:24:30 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1JZvqe-0000o7-JI for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 13 Mar 2008 18:24:29 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JZvqe-0000nk-9A for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 13 Mar 2008 18:24:28 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([140.186.70.10]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1JZvqe-0003eR-5L for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 13 Mar 2008 18:24:28 -0400 Original-Received: from rms by fencepost.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.67) (envelope-from ) id 1JZvqc-0000Mc-F8; Thu, 13 Mar 2008 18:24:26 -0400 In-reply-to: <47D86DC6.4080805@gmail.com> (lennart.borgman@gmail.com) X-detected-kernel: by monty-python.gnu.org: Linux 2.6, seldom 2.4 (older, 4) 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:92442 Archived-At: I can not see what the advantage with an interactive spec over a property on the function name is. Could you please tell? The interactive spec is where you specify other things about how to call the function interactively. So it is a cleaner interface to put this in the same place. And for the actual implementation of activating/deactivating the mark I can not see the advantage of doing it directly in the command loop instead of in special hooks before and after pre/post-command-hook. Using those hooks is unreliable and slow.