From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Stefan Monnier Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: `interactive-form` symbol property Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2018 08:32:45 -0400 Message-ID: References: <20180624121111.28772.8847@vcs0.savannah.gnu.org> <20180624121113.215CF206CC@vcs0.savannah.gnu.org> <87k1qokxa7.fsf@tcd.ie> <836028tauv.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1529929856 4618 195.159.176.226 (25 Jun 2018 12:30:56 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2018 12:30:56 +0000 (UTC) User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.0.50 (gnu/linux) Cc: contovob@tcd.ie, kfogel@red-bean.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Jun 25 14:30:51 2018 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1fXQdu-00015A-6K for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 25 Jun 2018 14:30:50 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:46567 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1fXQg1-0007pr-IT for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 25 Jun 2018 08:33:01 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:51357) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1fXQfs-0007ph-K2 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 25 Jun 2018 08:32:53 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1fXQfp-0002cw-Em for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 25 Jun 2018 08:32:52 -0400 Original-Received: from chene.dit.umontreal.ca ([132.204.246.20]:56711) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1fXQfp-0002bX-7s; Mon, 25 Jun 2018 08:32:49 -0400 Original-Received: from ceviche.home (lechon.iro.umontreal.ca [132.204.27.242]) by chene.dit.umontreal.ca (8.14.7/8.14.1) with ESMTP id w5PCXIsl002139; Mon, 25 Jun 2018 08:33:19 -0400 Original-Received: by ceviche.home (Postfix, from userid 20848) id 184546611F; Mon, 25 Jun 2018 08:32:45 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: <836028tauv.fsf@gnu.org> (Eli Zaretskii's message of "Sun, 24 Jun 2018 19:20:24 +0300") X-NAI-Spam-Flag: NO X-NAI-Spam-Threshold: 5 X-NAI-Spam-Score: 0 X-NAI-Spam-Rules: 2 Rules triggered EDT_SA_DN_PASS=0, RV6315=0 X-NAI-Spam-Version: 2.3.0.9418 : core <6315> : inlines <6714> : streams <1790707> : uri <2663816> X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. X-Received-From: 132.204.246.20 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 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" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:226702 Archived-At: >> Interesting case, indeed. >> >> You can do >> >> (defun my-foo () >> (interactive (advice-eval-interactive-spec >> (cadr (interactive-form 'bar)))) >> ...) >> >> Maybe we should promote `advice-eval-interactive-spec` to >> `eval-interactive-spec`? > Any reason you dislike the interactive-form property so much that you > are willing to promote anything else instead? ;-) The main reason is NIH, of course. But more generally when we have a mechanism (advice) that provides a superset of the other (interactive-form), I think it's always worthwhile to try and see if we really need to keep both. Stefan