From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Stefan Monnier Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Making `eglot-server-programs' a custom variable? Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2022 13:29:06 -0500 Message-ID: References: <86fservpri.fsf@gnu.org> <87cz9v97lo.fsf@posteo.net> <86r0yb234t.fsf@gnu.org> <87o7te7lc7.fsf@posteo.net> <87k0427k9i.fsf@posteo.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="40256"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/29.0.50 (gnu/linux) Cc: Arash Esbati , emacs-devel , =?windows-1252?B?Sm/jbyBU4XZvcmE=?= To: Philip Kaludercic Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Thu Nov 10 19:29:44 2022 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 1otCJ6-000AEa-1N for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Thu, 10 Nov 2022 19:29:44 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1otCId-0002YH-JA; Thu, 10 Nov 2022 13:29:15 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1otCIb-0002XN-8p for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 10 Nov 2022 13:29:13 -0500 Original-Received: from mailscanner.iro.umontreal.ca ([132.204.25.50]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1otCIZ-0007v8-R2; Thu, 10 Nov 2022 13:29:13 -0500 Original-Received: from pmg3.iro.umontreal.ca (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pmg3.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 44C1B440758; Thu, 10 Nov 2022 13:29:10 -0500 (EST) Original-Received: from mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (unknown [172.31.2.1]) by pmg3.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 588B54402E0; Thu, 10 Nov 2022 13:29:08 -0500 (EST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=iro.umontreal.ca; s=mail; t=1668104948; bh=gBvHySmtzvIcLjydNewVQ9mpIEQqhLVyWuWPN0xhPl0=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:From; b=FgYAW6WYLLfQjn6W3FyQc6Quo7avo506/ZllaCt0NI2hsUUVVhvkUpZUeyY74G+S/ SKjllWRtNFbeAkKkF4N+O5FFzINRc8oeDRkq8nG55D7D3EFGkRHcAtFOZdc/MbUTkQ XM0d83z1tuYiTINjfDh2oLlULcc354N217qp/k4IwQEQGHMNMCaKbEbOlFeEuTHBIN eT+jCJHIiFGW4w2PY1xI3nCxBuqAwyGU22E3Is3NfV9emfBAYHmLwnaj5BfgXNmRBp IHKc/6sDA0myHs2DAMbmjfsJ953Jec3IQifSSwP0s4Z+e55Dl2bweA49zLS+s0EXfE yQi355fuXO+/A== Original-Received: from lechazo (lechon.iro.umontreal.ca [132.204.27.242]) by mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 268BF120D4A; Thu, 10 Nov 2022 13:29:08 -0500 (EST) In-Reply-To: <87k0427k9i.fsf@posteo.net> (Philip Kaludercic's message of "Thu, 10 Nov 2022 18:10:49 +0000") Received-SPF: pass client-ip=132.204.25.50; envelope-from=monnier@iro.umontreal.ca; helo=mailscanner.iro.umontreal.ca X-Spam_score_int: -42 X-Spam_score: -4.3 X-Spam_bar: ---- X-Spam_report: (-4.3 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:299516 Archived-At: >> I suspect it would not be able to use `with-eval-after-load` because it >> wouldn't know which file holds/defines that var. But we could make it >> work for Custom vars, OTOH. > > I have the hunch that modifying `add-to-list' along these lines could > break a lot of subtle programs, I'd imagine the change would only affect the case where the var is unbound, i.e. where we currently signal an error. For that reason, it seems safe enough. > especially when they use `add-to-list' in place of `push'. It should be safe enough even for such bad-style cases. Stefan