From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Alan Mackenzie Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: [External] : Re: command mode-specificity [was: scratch/command 064f146 1/2: Change...] Date: Thu, 18 Feb 2021 16:30:59 +0000 Message-ID: References: <87tuqbft57.fsf@telefonica.net> <87im6rndo0.fsf@gnus.org> <87v9aqn5eq.fsf@gnus.org> <83h7ma7k5y.fsf@gnu.org> <87tuqa1ogn.fsf@gnus.org> <83tuqa5ug7.fsf@gnu.org> <87eehdy5ie.fsf@gnus.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="31762"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: ofv@wanadoo.es, Eli Zaretskii , monnier@iro.umontreal.ca, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Lars Ingebrigtsen Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Thu Feb 18 17:33:06 2021 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1lCmEk-0008A7-8Y for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Thu, 18 Feb 2021 17:33:06 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:38134 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lCmEj-0003OB-9j for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Thu, 18 Feb 2021 11:33:05 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:35988) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lCmCq-0001i9-0H for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 18 Feb 2021 11:31:11 -0500 Original-Received: from colin.muc.de ([193.149.48.1]:40190 helo=mail.muc.de) by eggs.gnu.org with smtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lCmCl-0000C9-3n for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 18 Feb 2021 11:31:07 -0500 Original-Received: (qmail 82338 invoked by uid 3782); 18 Feb 2021 16:31:00 -0000 Original-Received: from acm.muc.de (p4fe15a07.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [79.225.90.7]) (using STARTTLS) by colin.muc.de (tmda-ofmipd) with ESMTP; Thu, 18 Feb 2021 17:30:59 +0100 Original-Received: (qmail 25538 invoked by uid 1000); 18 Feb 2021 16:30:59 -0000 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <87eehdy5ie.fsf@gnus.org> X-Submission-Agent: TMDA/1.3.x (Ph3nix) X-Primary-Address: acm@muc.de Received-SPF: pass client-ip=193.149.48.1; envelope-from=acm@muc.de; helo=mail.muc.de X-Spam_score_int: -18 X-Spam_score: -1.9 X-Spam_bar: - X-Spam_report: (-1.9 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 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-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:265162 Archived-At: Hello, Lars. On Thu, Feb 18, 2021 at 12:33:45 +0100, Lars Ingebrigtsen wrote: > Eli Zaretskii writes: > > What happens when a command that was only relevant to a single mode is > > extended to become more widely used? Wouldn't we need to remove the > > tagging? And if we do need to do it, how will we manage not to forget > > updating the tagging? > The tagging is right there in the `interactive' spec (and not somewhere > else (in a plist, for instance)), which is one of the reasons that I > want the syntax to be easy and clear -- it makes it much less likely > that somebody will forget to change the tagging in cases like this. > (But I don't think that we will, in practice, see all that much of this. > Nobody is going to suddenly use commands from 5x5.el in dired.el.) What about commands used by a small number of modes, but that set of modes is only known at runtime? Are we supposed to amend a command's interactive spec at runtime? > -- > (domestic pets only, the antidote for overdose, milk.) > bloggy blog: http://lars.ingebrigtsen.no -- Alan Mackenzie (Nuremberg, Germany).