Re: Placement of list within an interactive clause

[Christopher Dimech <dimech@gmx.com>]

> Sent: Friday, July 15, 2022 at 7:26 PM
> From: "Jean Louis" <bugs@gnu.support>
> To: carlmarcos@tutanota.com
> Cc: "Help Gnu Emacs" <help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org>
> Subject: Re: Placement of list within an interactive clause
>
> Most of time I do not use `interactive' for supply arguments to
> function.
> 
> Thus instead of following:
> 
> (defun my-fun-1 (&optional name)
>   (interactive "MName: ")
>   (message "Hello %s" name))
> 
> I am using following:
> 
> (defun my-fun-2 (&optional name)
>   (interactive)
>   (let ((name (or name (read-from-minibuffer "Name: "))))
>     (message "Hello %s" name)))
> 
> as that gives me little more freedom:
> 
> - if I call (my-fun-1) ⇒ "Hello nil" that result is not what I
>  really want. It makes it difficult to get the wanted result. To
>  get the wanted result I need to use:
> 
> (call-interactively 'my-fun-1) ⇒ "Hello Bob"
> 
> - but if I call (my-fun-2) and NAME is not supplied, I will be
>   asked for name: (my-fun-2) ⇒ "Hello Bob" and will not get "NIL"
>   as result. In this case I need not complicate the call and use
> `call-interactively`.
> 
> Additionall, complex `interactive` clauses I find often too
> difficult to comprehend than reading the body of the function.

Yes, but you are forced for interactive commands.  It is not equivalent
to a function that is non-interactive.
 
> Fo this reason I recommend using this second approach with (or
> ARGUMENT (GET-ARGUMENT)) rather then using `interactive` with
> purpose to supply arguments.
> 
> 
> -- 
> Jean
> 
> Take action in Free Software Foundation campaigns:
> https://www.fsf.org/campaigns
> 
> In support of Richard M. Stallman
> https://stallmansupport.org/
> 
>