From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Lennart Borgman Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Can ad-do-it be used in a function called from the defadvice code? Date: Wed, 1 Jul 2009 19:42:06 +0200 Message-ID: References: <55477.130.55.118.19.1246464163.squirrel@webmail.lanl.gov> <878wj8wdqx.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1246470427 27432 80.91.229.12 (1 Jul 2009 17:47:07 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 1 Jul 2009 17:47:07 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Emacs-Devel devel To: "Stephen J. Turnbull" Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Jul 01 19:47:00 2009 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 1MM3tb-0004wf-WC for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 01 Jul 2009 19:47:00 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:40474 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1MM3tb-0001nB-BU for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 01 Jul 2009 13:46:59 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1MM3oy-0005nr-2Q for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 01 Jul 2009 13:42:12 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1MM3ot-0005jW-RQ for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 01 Jul 2009 13:42:11 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=34006 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1MM3ot-0005jT-Mo for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 01 Jul 2009 13:42:07 -0400 Original-Received: from mail-fx0-f217.google.com ([209.85.220.217]:44128) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1MM3ot-0000sJ-D6 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 01 Jul 2009 13:42:07 -0400 Original-Received: by fxm17 with SMTP id 17so581047fxm.42 for ; Wed, 01 Jul 2009 10:42:06 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:in-reply-to:references :date:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=n+vphRa9RgIYd4PFOIp0IBEjxF97f1xM9rpS6LUue+s=; b=wBGkmibIDP4TzReJAL2TDbloZsIy6WKmsSgO0li5RM2F0FIjPgXjJ67EbJLEjprNIR ZRBpl6r9PamovNOsfLGbXA5dtvMD/lo7kSeqT+PCH1UNjCZHoHh5KvGWS2bFxIhoaxbN fGH61avxmcUPhc3BIfDbH8ziU2bDCaSu4fo+c= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=pHGiWOzJOmnZ23DMXkx/Ehh5YuYFfzne7hHivVZlOt34fBzHTK4i8j81XDlJwMIFjR Z5sQKd5tK45A87i+RK7IsBOQmJz5yfe10EQGbID6RgfPPprILkEZtGoGcOrjZaNetpKP 7nlIskqpwI8e2B6lfKeKEYDsx5JpXDwn5Uw1s= Original-Received: by 10.239.146.212 with SMTP id x20mr835527hba.97.1246470126214; Wed, 01 Jul 2009 10:42:06 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <878wj8wdqx.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> X-detected-operating-system: by monty-python.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 2) 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:111868 Archived-At: On Wed, Jul 1, 2009 at 6:48 PM, Stephen J. Turnbull wro= te: > Lennart Borgman writes: > > =C2=A0> Thanks Davis, but maybe you are right that it is hard to implemen= t, > =C2=A0> but on the other hand can't ad-do-it be left as a placeholder whe= re > =C2=A0> the correct function is called when needed. It does not seem to b= e > =C2=A0> very much overhead to me since the let-binding structure is alrea= dy > =C2=A0> there and probably can be used with some mangling. > > And what do you do if there are multiple pieces of advice active? > Which original function does is the "correct function" that this > particular 'ad-do-it refers to? The innermost I guess. But maybe that could lead to ambiguities too? I am not sure.