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: What version of Emacs still requires '*' in defcustom docs? Date: Sun, 12 Feb 2012 07:42:26 -0800 Message-ID: References: <1a4nuxknrk.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> <87wr7sxsp7.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1329061371 22051 80.91.229.3 (12 Feb 2012 15:42:51 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 12 Feb 2012 15:42:51 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: "'Chong Yidong'" , "'Glenn Morris'" Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sun Feb 12 16:42:49 2012 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([140.186.70.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1RwbZf-0001mb-CU for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 12 Feb 2012 16:42:47 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:47827 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RwbZe-0006zi-U4 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 12 Feb 2012 10:42:46 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]:59703) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RwbZb-0006zW-Ls for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 12 Feb 2012 10:42:45 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RwbZa-0005XI-HX for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 12 Feb 2012 10:42:43 -0500 Original-Received: from acsinet15.oracle.com ([141.146.126.227]:31432) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RwbZa-0005Wy-9f; Sun, 12 Feb 2012 10:42:42 -0500 Original-Received: from ucsinet22.oracle.com (ucsinet22.oracle.com [156.151.31.94]) by acsinet15.oracle.com (Sentrion-MTA-4.2.2/Sentrion-MTA-4.2.2) with ESMTP id q1CFgaK5007526 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Sun, 12 Feb 2012 15:42:38 GMT Original-Received: from acsmt358.oracle.com (acsmt358.oracle.com [141.146.40.158]) by ucsinet22.oracle.com (8.14.4+Sun/8.14.4) with ESMTP id q1CFgZ8Q015499 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Sun, 12 Feb 2012 15:42:36 GMT Original-Received: from abhmt109.oracle.com (abhmt109.oracle.com [141.146.116.61]) by acsmt358.oracle.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with ESMTP id q1CFgZnJ004235; Sun, 12 Feb 2012 09:42:35 -0600 Original-Received: from dradamslap1 (/10.159.51.171) by default (Oracle Beehive Gateway v4.0) with ESMTP ; Sun, 12 Feb 2012 07:42:34 -0800 X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 11 In-Reply-To: <87wr7sxsp7.fsf@gnu.org> Thread-Index: Aczpb2YSLO4QhmwSQE+vBX8EhbkcLQALMaHQ X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.6157 X-Source-IP: ucsinet22.oracle.com [156.151.31.94] X-CT-RefId: str=0001.0A090202.4F37DDEE.0071,ss=1,re=0.000,fgs=0 X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 1) X-Received-From: 141.146.126.227 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 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.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:148502 Archived-At: > > The practice of giving the docs of defcustoms a leading '*' doesn't > > seem to want to die out. For those of you doing this, what > > version of Emacs are you trying to support that requires this? > > > > Eg GNU Emacs has not needed this since at least 21.1 (see > > user-variable-p). > > FWIW, I intend to convert user-variable-p into an alias for > custom-variable-p after the release. So `set-variable' will be broken for user variables defined using `defvar' with `*'. Or do you plan to modify `custom-variable-p' so it recognizes those as well? In which case we will lose the distinction between the two kinds of user variable. In addition to providing no such details, you gave no reason for the proposed change. What for? Why is it important to make such a change?