From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Rand Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: split-window as a command Date: Fri, 12 Apr 2013 19:44:31 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: References: <87ppy0p4cm.fsf@rosalinde.fritz.box> <5167D3E8.8000903@gmx.at> <87obdkf097.fsf@rosalinde.fritz.box> <51681696.7000405@gmx.at> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1365796215 28145 80.91.229.3 (12 Apr 2013 19:50:15 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 12 Apr 2013 19:50:15 +0000 (UTC) To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Apr 12 21:50:19 2013 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1UQjzG-0001Z7-Ps for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 12 Apr 2013 21:50:18 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:41205 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UQjzG-0004a2-G5 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 12 Apr 2013 15:50:18 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:34958) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UQjz7-0004Zq-W2 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 12 Apr 2013 15:50:15 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UQjz3-0003eF-6l for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 12 Apr 2013 15:50:09 -0400 Original-Received: from plane.gmane.org ([80.91.229.3]:56212) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UQjz3-0003bk-0g for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 12 Apr 2013 15:50:05 -0400 Original-Received: from list by plane.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1UQjz1-0001A1-Cb for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 12 Apr 2013 21:50:03 +0200 Original-Received: from 173-217-221-231-rstn.mid.dyn.suddenlink.net ([173-217-221-231-rstn.mid.dyn.suddenlink.net]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Fri, 12 Apr 2013 21:50:03 +0200 Original-Received: from rand.user by 173-217-221-231-rstn.mid.dyn.suddenlink.net with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Fri, 12 Apr 2013 21:50:03 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ Original-Lines: 29 Original-X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: sea.gmane.org User-Agent: Loom/3.14 (http://gmane.org/) X-Loom-IP: 173.217.221.231 (Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686) AppleWebKit/537.31 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/26.0.1410.63 Safari/537.31) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. X-Received-From: 80.91.229.3 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:158863 Archived-At: Stephen Berman gmx.net> writes: > The doc string of split-window says "Interactively, SIZE is the prefix > argument." But in fact, invoking split-window with a prefix argument > has no effect, because its interactive spec is "i". Maybe this is just > a doc bug, since, when split-window was still a C function, its doc > string said "Interactively, all arguments are nil." But I don't see why > it is a command at all any more: invoked interactively, it has exactly > the same effect as invoking split-window-below without a prefix > argument, and since the latter does not ignore a prefix argument passed > to it, it does more than interactively called split-window. So it > appears to be superfluous for split-window to be a command. Or am I > overlooking something? It may be superfluous but it has always been a command and removing the interactive form would break existing keybindings and usage. I think that: * Fixing the doc-string would be better than removing the interactive form. * Changing the interactive form to use the prefix argument would be better than fixing the doc-string. -- Rand