* emacs -Q not documented @ 2005-03-29 14:28 Werner LEMBERG [not found] ` <E1DH4IQ-00048v-Bw@fencepost.gnu.org> 0 siblings, 1 reply; 37+ messages in thread From: Werner LEMBERG @ 2005-03-29 14:28 UTC (permalink / raw) [emacs 2005-03-29] Option `-Q' isn't documented in emacs --help. Werner ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 37+ messages in thread
[parent not found: <E1DH4IQ-00048v-Bw@fencepost.gnu.org>]
* Re: emacs -Q not documented [not found] ` <E1DH4IQ-00048v-Bw@fencepost.gnu.org> @ 2005-04-02 6:47 ` Werner LEMBERG 2005-04-02 9:58 ` David Kastrup 2005-04-03 21:20 ` Richard Stallman 0 siblings, 2 replies; 37+ messages in thread From: Werner LEMBERG @ 2005-04-02 6:47 UTC (permalink / raw) Cc: emacs-devel > Option `-Q' isn't documented in emacs --help. > > Would you like to fix that? The patch is trivial, but we should probably add a long name for it. What about `--bare'? Werner ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 37+ messages in thread
* Re: emacs -Q not documented 2005-04-02 6:47 ` Werner LEMBERG @ 2005-04-02 9:58 ` David Kastrup 2005-04-02 11:02 ` Nick Roberts 2005-04-03 21:20 ` Richard Stallman 1 sibling, 1 reply; 37+ messages in thread From: David Kastrup @ 2005-04-02 9:58 UTC (permalink / raw) Cc: rms, emacs-devel Werner LEMBERG <wl@gnu.org> writes: >> Option `-Q' isn't documented in emacs --help. >> >> Would you like to fix that? > > The patch is trivial, but we should probably add a long name for it. > What about `--bare'? How about --plain or --vanilla? -- David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 37+ messages in thread
* Re: emacs -Q not documented 2005-04-02 9:58 ` David Kastrup @ 2005-04-02 11:02 ` Nick Roberts 2005-04-02 22:17 ` Miles Bader 0 siblings, 1 reply; 37+ messages in thread From: Nick Roberts @ 2005-04-02 11:02 UTC (permalink / raw) Cc: rms, emacs-devel > >> Option `-Q' isn't documented in emacs --help. > >> > >> Would you like to fix that? > > > > The patch is trivial, but we should probably add a long name for it. > > What about `--bare'? This would be confusing because a 'bare Emacs' means something else. > How about --plain or --vanilla? I don't think these are explanatory. If we can't think of a suitable name why should we add one? Nick ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 37+ messages in thread
* Re: emacs -Q not documented 2005-04-02 11:02 ` Nick Roberts @ 2005-04-02 22:17 ` Miles Bader 2005-04-02 22:47 ` David Kastrup 2005-04-02 22:52 ` Kim F. Storm 0 siblings, 2 replies; 37+ messages in thread From: Miles Bader @ 2005-04-02 22:17 UTC (permalink / raw) Cc: rms, emacs-devel On Apr 2, 2005 8:02 PM, Nick Roberts <nickrob@snap.net.nz> wrote: > I don't think these are explanatory. > > If we can't think of a suitable name why should we add one? Well obviously if we can't think of a good name, we shouldn't add a bad one :-), but long option names, if well-chosen, are often _much_ easier to remember if you only use the option very occasionally... So it's worth at least a bit of effort to come up with one. I think it needn't be _completely_ self-explanatory, as long as it's easy to remember, and "makes sense" after reading the options documentation or --help output. Something like `--vanilla' is probably not going to indicate to a completely naive user what's going on, but it's almost certainly meaningful enough[*] to jog the memory of someone who has read the documentation in the past (whereas -Q is more iffy). How about `--default-settings' (which could be abbreviated `--default'; perhaps it ought to also accept the plural of that, `--defaults', without actually putting it in the option help)? [*] For a native english speaker -- this is the big problem with `--vanilla' I think. -Miles -- Do not taunt Happy Fun Ball. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 37+ messages in thread
* Re: emacs -Q not documented 2005-04-02 22:17 ` Miles Bader @ 2005-04-02 22:47 ` David Kastrup 2005-04-02 22:52 ` Kim F. Storm 1 sibling, 0 replies; 37+ messages in thread From: David Kastrup @ 2005-04-02 22:47 UTC (permalink / raw) Cc: Nick Roberts, emacs-devel, rms, miles Miles Bader <snogglethorpe@gmail.com> writes: > How about `--default-settings' (which could be abbreviated > `--default'; perhaps it ought to also accept the plural of that, > `--defaults', without actually putting it in the option help)? Since the settings are _not_ the defaults (for example, blink-cursor is off), that would be extremely misleading. --plain would be another proposal. -- David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 37+ messages in thread
* Re: emacs -Q not documented 2005-04-02 22:17 ` Miles Bader 2005-04-02 22:47 ` David Kastrup @ 2005-04-02 22:52 ` Kim F. Storm 2005-04-02 23:00 ` Miles Bader 2005-04-02 23:45 ` Nick Roberts 1 sibling, 2 replies; 37+ messages in thread From: Kim F. Storm @ 2005-04-02 22:52 UTC (permalink / raw) Cc: Nick Roberts, emacs-devel, rms, miles Miles Bader <snogglethorpe@gmail.com> writes: > How about `--default-settings' (which could be abbreviated > `--default'; perhaps it ought to also accept the plural of that, > `--defaults', without actually putting it in the option help)? I think that would be very confusing -- -Q actually turns off some of the default features such as splash screen, toolbar, menubar, scroll bars etc. --no-nothing :-) -- Kim F. Storm <storm@cua.dk> http://www.cua.dk ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 37+ messages in thread
* Re: emacs -Q not documented 2005-04-02 22:52 ` Kim F. Storm @ 2005-04-02 23:00 ` Miles Bader 2005-04-02 23:21 ` Henrik Enberg 2005-04-02 23:45 ` Nick Roberts 1 sibling, 1 reply; 37+ messages in thread From: Miles Bader @ 2005-04-02 23:00 UTC (permalink / raw) Cc: Nick Roberts, emacs-devel, rms, miles On Apr 3, 2005 7:52 AM, Kim F. Storm <storm@cua.dk> wrote: > I think that would be very confusing -- -Q actually turns off some of > the default features such as splash screen, toolbar, menubar, scroll > bars etc. > > --no-nothing :-) `--minimal-defaults' ? -Miles -- Do not taunt Happy Fun Ball. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 37+ messages in thread
* Re: emacs -Q not documented 2005-04-02 23:00 ` Miles Bader @ 2005-04-02 23:21 ` Henrik Enberg 2005-04-02 23:37 ` Miles Bader 0 siblings, 1 reply; 37+ messages in thread From: Henrik Enberg @ 2005-04-02 23:21 UTC (permalink / raw) Cc: Nick Roberts, Kim F. Storm, emacs-devel, rms, miles Miles Bader <snogglethorpe@gmail.com> writes: > On Apr 3, 2005 7:52 AM, Kim F. Storm <storm@cua.dk> wrote: >> I think that would be very confusing -- -Q actually turns off some of >> the default features such as splash screen, toolbar, menubar, scroll >> bars etc. >> >> --no-nothing :-) > > `--minimal-defaults' ? How about just `--minimal'? Should be fairly self-explanatory. -- Vaya Con Satan ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 37+ messages in thread
* Re: emacs -Q not documented 2005-04-02 23:21 ` Henrik Enberg @ 2005-04-02 23:37 ` Miles Bader 0 siblings, 0 replies; 37+ messages in thread From: Miles Bader @ 2005-04-02 23:37 UTC (permalink / raw) Cc: Nick Roberts, Kim F. Storm, emacs-devel, rms, miles On Apr 3, 2005 8:21 AM, Henrik Enberg <henrik.enberg@telia.com> wrote: > > `--minimal-defaults' ? > > How about just `--minimal'? Should be fairly self-explanatory. I think it's somewhat misleading -- -Q apparently does _two_ things: (1) it ignores all customizations, and (2) uses `minimal settings' (turns off toolbars etc.) `--minimal' implies that it only does (2). `--minimal-defaults' explicitly refers to both (1) and (2). -Miles -- Do not taunt Happy Fun Ball. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 37+ messages in thread
* Re: emacs -Q not documented 2005-04-02 22:52 ` Kim F. Storm 2005-04-02 23:00 ` Miles Bader @ 2005-04-02 23:45 ` Nick Roberts 1 sibling, 0 replies; 37+ messages in thread From: Nick Roberts @ 2005-04-02 23:45 UTC (permalink / raw) Cc: miles, snogglethorpe, rms, emacs-devel > > How about `--default-settings' (which could be abbreviated > > `--default'; perhaps it ought to also accept the plural of that, > > `--defaults', without actually putting it in the option help)? > > I think that would be very confusing -- -Q actually turns off some of > the default features such as splash screen, toolbar, menubar, scroll > bars etc. > > --no-nothing :-) --no-toolbar-menubar-scrollbars-blinking-cursor-splash-screen-init-or-site-file says it all, but -Q which one could guess is "quicker" than -q, is a bit more to the point. Nick ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 37+ messages in thread
* Re: emacs -Q not documented 2005-04-02 6:47 ` Werner LEMBERG 2005-04-02 9:58 ` David Kastrup @ 2005-04-03 21:20 ` Richard Stallman 2005-04-04 22:12 ` Miles Bader ` (2 more replies) 1 sibling, 3 replies; 37+ messages in thread From: Richard Stallman @ 2005-04-03 21:20 UTC (permalink / raw) Cc: emacs-devel The patch is trivial, but we should probably add a long name for it. I guess so--if we keep it. But the set of things it does is not really coherent. It turns off all init files; it also turns off various frame features such as the menu bar and tool bar, it turns off tool tips, and it selects a different type of cursor. There is nothing particularly natural or desirable about this combination. I see no reason to have a short option for it. Perhaps we should just remove it. Why was -Q installed, anyway? ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 37+ messages in thread
* Re: emacs -Q not documented 2005-04-03 21:20 ` Richard Stallman @ 2005-04-04 22:12 ` Miles Bader 2005-04-04 22:13 ` Miles Bader 2005-04-05 7:31 ` Kim F. Storm 2 siblings, 0 replies; 37+ messages in thread From: Miles Bader @ 2005-04-04 22:12 UTC (permalink / raw) Cc: emacs-devel On Apr 4, 2005 6:20 AM, Richard Stallman <rms@gnu.org> wrote: > Why was -Q installed, anyway? I seem to recall it was intended for some debugging scenario (e.g. turning off lots of features helps simplify things). I agree it's overly weird; the "no init files" functionality is very useful though, and naturally maps to -Q (by analogy with -q). Maybe if those other features are useful they could be invoked by a separate option. -Miles -- Do not taunt Happy Fun Ball. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 37+ messages in thread
* Re: emacs -Q not documented 2005-04-03 21:20 ` Richard Stallman 2005-04-04 22:12 ` Miles Bader @ 2005-04-04 22:13 ` Miles Bader 2005-04-05 7:31 ` Kim F. Storm 2 siblings, 0 replies; 37+ messages in thread From: Miles Bader @ 2005-04-04 22:13 UTC (permalink / raw) Cc: emacs-devel On Apr 4, 2005 6:20 AM, Richard Stallman <rms@gnu.org> wrote: > Why was -Q installed, anyway? I seem to recall it was intended for some debugging scenario (e.g. turning off lots of features helps simplify things). I agree it's overly weird. The "no init files" functionality is very useful though, and naturally maps to -Q (by analogy with -q). Maybe if those other features are useful they could be triggered by a separate option; specifying two short options is not much harder than one. -Miles -- Do not taunt Happy Fun Ball. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 37+ messages in thread
* Re: emacs -Q not documented 2005-04-03 21:20 ` Richard Stallman 2005-04-04 22:12 ` Miles Bader 2005-04-04 22:13 ` Miles Bader @ 2005-04-05 7:31 ` Kim F. Storm 2005-04-05 9:27 ` Miles Bader ` (2 more replies) 2 siblings, 3 replies; 37+ messages in thread From: Kim F. Storm @ 2005-04-05 7:31 UTC (permalink / raw) Cc: emacs-devel Richard Stallman <rms@gnu.org> writes: > The patch is trivial, but we should probably add a long name for it. > > I guess so--if we keep it. But the set of things it does is not > really coherent. > > It turns off all init files; it also turns off various frame features > such as the menu bar and tool bar, it turns off tool tips, > and it selects a different type of cursor. There is nothing particularly > natural or desirable about this combination. It is intended to be an option turn off all "extra features". This is _extremely_ useful for reporting and debugging redisplay problems, as it removes a lot of extra stuff that is most often irrelevant to a specific problem. Just like we ask people to try emacs -q for reported problems in lisp code, it is very useful to ask a person to try reproducing a redisplay problem with emacs -Q and if the problem exists in that situation, you can quickly eliminate a lot of possible causes of the problem. But most important, running emacs -Q when debugging redisplay problems makes it much easier to know what's going on. > I see no reason to have > a short option for it. Perhaps we should just remove it. Just because we cannot find a long name for it -- that's silly, IMO! Please keep the option. It serves the purpose it was added for very well!! > > Why was -Q installed, anyway? You approved it... -- Kim F. Storm <storm@cua.dk> http://www.cua.dk ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 37+ messages in thread
* Re: emacs -Q not documented 2005-04-05 7:31 ` Kim F. Storm @ 2005-04-05 9:27 ` Miles Bader 2005-04-05 10:04 ` Kim F. Storm 2005-04-05 13:22 ` Robert J. Chassell 2005-04-06 3:02 ` Richard Stallman 2 siblings, 1 reply; 37+ messages in thread From: Miles Bader @ 2005-04-05 9:27 UTC (permalink / raw) Cc: rms, emacs-devel On Apr 5, 2005 4:31 PM, Kim F. Storm <storm@cua.dk> wrote: > Just because we cannot find a long name for it -- that's silly, IMO! > Please keep the option. It serves the purpose it was added for very > well!! There seems no reason not to split it into a couple of more coherent options though. -Miles -- Do not taunt Happy Fun Ball. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 37+ messages in thread
* Re: emacs -Q not documented 2005-04-05 9:27 ` Miles Bader @ 2005-04-05 10:04 ` Kim F. Storm 2005-04-05 10:27 ` Miles Bader 0 siblings, 1 reply; 37+ messages in thread From: Kim F. Storm @ 2005-04-05 10:04 UTC (permalink / raw) Cc: emacs-devel, rms, miles Miles Bader <snogglethorpe@gmail.com> writes: > On Apr 5, 2005 4:31 PM, Kim F. Storm <storm@cua.dk> wrote: >> Just because we cannot find a long name for it -- that's silly, IMO! >> Please keep the option. It serves the purpose it was added for very >> well!! > > There seems no reason not to split it into a couple of more coherent > options though. So instead of "emacs -Q" I have to ask a user to please try "emacs -q -A -T --no-bla-bla -V --no-blinking-cursor" As I said: Please keep the option. It serves the purpose it was added for very well!! -- Kim F. Storm <storm@cua.dk> http://www.cua.dk ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 37+ messages in thread
* Re: emacs -Q not documented 2005-04-05 10:04 ` Kim F. Storm @ 2005-04-05 10:27 ` Miles Bader 2005-04-05 10:40 ` Miles Bader 0 siblings, 1 reply; 37+ messages in thread From: Miles Bader @ 2005-04-05 10:27 UTC (permalink / raw) Cc: emacs-devel, rms, miles On Apr 5, 2005 7:04 PM, Kim F. Storm <storm@cua.dk> wrote: > > There seems no reason not to split it into a couple of more coherent > > options though. > > So instead of "emacs -Q" I have to ask a user to please try > "emacs -q -A -T --no-bla-bla -V --no-blinking-cursor" That's a strawman. I meant something like: emacs -Q -N where -Q means "no init files or site-init files" and -N means turn off all frame features I think typing a few extra letters in such rare cases is hardly going to cause much hardship, and the improvement in clarity makes it worthwhile. -Miles -- Do not taunt Happy Fun Ball. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 37+ messages in thread
* Re: emacs -Q not documented 2005-04-05 10:27 ` Miles Bader @ 2005-04-05 10:40 ` Miles Bader 2005-04-05 11:16 ` Kim F. Storm 0 siblings, 1 reply; 37+ messages in thread From: Miles Bader @ 2005-04-05 10:40 UTC (permalink / raw) Cc: emacs-devel, rms, miles On Apr 5, 2005 7:27 PM, Miles Bader <snogglethorpe@gmail.com> wrote: > emacs -Q -N > > where -Q means "no init files or site-init files" > and -N means turn off all frame features I should add that doing so is more flexible for debugging too -- for instance, for reporting a bug with menus, you don't want frame features turned off, but you _do_ want to disable site-init files. This scenario (where you want to disable all customization, but not change emacs' "default state") is probably the most common, so it makes sense to give -Q that common and clear meaning, and add something like -N for the rarer case where you suspect the frame features are interfering. -Miles -- Do not taunt Happy Fun Ball. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 37+ messages in thread
* Re: emacs -Q not documented 2005-04-05 10:40 ` Miles Bader @ 2005-04-05 11:16 ` Kim F. Storm 0 siblings, 0 replies; 37+ messages in thread From: Kim F. Storm @ 2005-04-05 11:16 UTC (permalink / raw) Cc: emacs-devel, rms, miles Miles Bader <snogglethorpe@gmail.com> writes: > On Apr 5, 2005 7:27 PM, Miles Bader <snogglethorpe@gmail.com> wrote: >> emacs -Q -N >> >> where -Q means "no init files or site-init files" >> and -N means turn off all frame features > > I should add that doing so is more flexible for debugging too -- for > instance, for reporting a bug with menus, you don't want frame > features turned off, but you _do_ want to disable site-init files. -N also disables the splash screen, blinking cursor, and potentially other stuff that is not closely related to "frame features". What long name will you use for -N? So the next thing somebody will tell us is that -N consists of unrelated settings, and suggest to split it into -N and -M and ? > This scenario (where you want to disable all customization, but not > change emacs' "default state") is probably the most common, so it > makes sense to give -Q that common and clear meaning, IMO, emacs -Q (in its current form) should be the reference for reproducing errors -- if possible with even more features/settings turned off (e.g. ignore .Xdefaults, Windows registry settings, etc). -- Kim F. Storm <storm@cua.dk> http://www.cua.dk ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 37+ messages in thread
* Re: emacs -Q not documented 2005-04-05 7:31 ` Kim F. Storm 2005-04-05 9:27 ` Miles Bader @ 2005-04-05 13:22 ` Robert J. Chassell 2005-04-05 13:44 ` David Kastrup 2005-04-06 3:02 ` Richard Stallman 2 siblings, 1 reply; 37+ messages in thread From: Robert J. Chassell @ 2005-04-05 13:22 UTC (permalink / raw) > -Q It is intended to be an option turn off all "extra features". Yes. The option is helpful and should be kept. It is easier than evoking Emacs with an equivalent long string of options, which are: emacs -q \ --no-site-file \ --no-blinking-cursor \ --eval '(progn (tooltip-mode -1) (tool-bar-mode -1) (menu-bar-mode -1) (scroll-bar-mode -1) (setq inhibit-startup-message t))' (`nil' instead of `-1' causes the evaluated functions to produce a message, so is no good.) If we need a long name for `-Q', and do not wish to use `--plain', please consider --no-init-site-splash-decorations-blinking which is long and ugly but does tell you what the option avoids. -- Robert J. Chassell bob@rattlesnake.com GnuPG Key ID: 004B4AC8 http://www.rattlesnake.com http://www.teak.cc ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 37+ messages in thread
* Re: emacs -Q not documented 2005-04-05 13:22 ` Robert J. Chassell @ 2005-04-05 13:44 ` David Kastrup 2005-04-05 14:05 ` Kim F. Storm 0 siblings, 1 reply; 37+ messages in thread From: David Kastrup @ 2005-04-05 13:44 UTC (permalink / raw) Cc: emacs-devel "Robert J. Chassell" <bob@rattlesnake.com> writes: > > -Q > > It is intended to be an option turn off all "extra features". > > Yes. The option is helpful and should be kept. > > It is easier than evoking Emacs with an equivalent long string of > options, which are: > > emacs -q \ > --no-site-file \ > --no-blinking-cursor \ > --eval '(progn > (tooltip-mode -1) > (tool-bar-mode -1) > (menu-bar-mode -1) > (scroll-bar-mode -1) > (setq inhibit-startup-message t))' Well, that argument would hold for any option string. > (`nil' instead of `-1' causes the evaluated functions to produce a > message, so is no good.) > > If we need a long name for `-Q', and do not wish to use `--plain', > please consider > > --no-init-site-splash-decorations-blinking > > which is long and ugly but does tell you what the option avoids. --basic-defaults would be another possibility. -- David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 37+ messages in thread
* Re: emacs -Q not documented 2005-04-05 13:44 ` David Kastrup @ 2005-04-05 14:05 ` Kim F. Storm 2005-04-05 14:09 ` David Kastrup 0 siblings, 1 reply; 37+ messages in thread From: Kim F. Storm @ 2005-04-05 14:05 UTC (permalink / raw) Cc: bob, emacs-devel David Kastrup <dak@gnu.org> writes: > --basic-defaults > > would be another possibility. Still, "defaults" is non-informative in this context. IMO --minimal would be good, but is too close to --minimize. Some synonymes are: --basic --slim --mean --reduced --nominal -- Kim F. Storm <storm@cua.dk> http://www.cua.dk ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 37+ messages in thread
* Re: emacs -Q not documented 2005-04-05 14:05 ` Kim F. Storm @ 2005-04-05 14:09 ` David Kastrup 2005-04-05 14:44 ` Kim F. Storm 0 siblings, 1 reply; 37+ messages in thread From: David Kastrup @ 2005-04-05 14:09 UTC (permalink / raw) Cc: bob, emacs-devel storm@cua.dk (Kim F. Storm) writes: > David Kastrup <dak@gnu.org> writes: > >> --basic-defaults >> >> would be another possibility. > > Still, "defaults" is non-informative in this context. > > IMO --minimal would be good, but is too close to --minimize. > > Some synonymes are: > > --basic > --slim > --mean > --reduced > --nominal --stripped-down -- David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 37+ messages in thread
* Re: emacs -Q not documented 2005-04-05 14:09 ` David Kastrup @ 2005-04-05 14:44 ` Kim F. Storm 2005-04-05 14:53 ` David Kastrup 0 siblings, 1 reply; 37+ messages in thread From: Kim F. Storm @ 2005-04-05 14:44 UTC (permalink / raw) Cc: bob, emacs-devel David Kastrup <dak@gnu.org> writes: > --stripped-down --naked :-) -- Kim F. Storm <storm@cua.dk> http://www.cua.dk ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 37+ messages in thread
* Re: emacs -Q not documented 2005-04-05 14:44 ` Kim F. Storm @ 2005-04-05 14:53 ` David Kastrup 0 siblings, 0 replies; 37+ messages in thread From: David Kastrup @ 2005-04-05 14:53 UTC (permalink / raw) Cc: bob, emacs-devel storm@cua.dk (Kim F. Storm) writes: > David Kastrup <dak@gnu.org> writes: > >> --stripped-down > > --naked :-) Too close to --flashing. -- David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 37+ messages in thread
* Re: emacs -Q not documented 2005-04-05 7:31 ` Kim F. Storm 2005-04-05 9:27 ` Miles Bader 2005-04-05 13:22 ` Robert J. Chassell @ 2005-04-06 3:02 ` Richard Stallman 2005-04-06 7:14 ` Kim F. Storm 2005-04-06 8:45 ` Werner LEMBERG 2 siblings, 2 replies; 37+ messages in thread From: Richard Stallman @ 2005-04-06 3:02 UTC (permalink / raw) Cc: emacs-devel It is intended to be an option turn off all "extra features". On what criterion are these features "extra"? But most important, running emacs -Q when debugging redisplay problems makes it much easier to know what's going on. Why does the blinking cursor relate to this? Just because we cannot find a long name for it -- that's silly, IMO! The difficulty in finding a long name for it reflected a lack of apparent coherence of the functionality of the option. Nobody could see what it was good for. That is why I thought of removing it or changing it. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 37+ messages in thread
* Re: emacs -Q not documented 2005-04-06 3:02 ` Richard Stallman @ 2005-04-06 7:14 ` Kim F. Storm 2005-04-06 7:48 ` Nick Roberts 2005-04-06 23:02 ` Richard Stallman 2005-04-06 8:45 ` Werner LEMBERG 1 sibling, 2 replies; 37+ messages in thread From: Kim F. Storm @ 2005-04-06 7:14 UTC (permalink / raw) Cc: emacs-devel Richard Stallman <rms@gnu.org> writes: > It is intended to be an option turn off all "extra features". > > On what criterion are these features "extra"? They are various "decorations" to the basic Emacs frame or functionality. Turning them off, skips over a fairly big (and complex) part of internal redisplay code (e.g. building menu and tool bars which may run quite a deal of lisp code). > > But most important, running emacs -Q when debugging redisplay problems > makes it much easier to know what's going on. > > Why does the blinking cursor relate to this? It means running timers and async Lisp code, and triggers redisplay which may influense how a bug in redisplay manifests itself on the screen. Furthermore, it means you cannot just put a breakpoint on (or anywhere inside) redisplay_internal and then execute some code to generate a specific error... The blinking cursor timer will trigger that breakpoint every second, making it practically impossible to debug such problems. The -Q option has saved me many hours debugging rediplay problems! -- Kim F. Storm <storm@cua.dk> http://www.cua.dk ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 37+ messages in thread
* Re: emacs -Q not documented 2005-04-06 7:14 ` Kim F. Storm @ 2005-04-06 7:48 ` Nick Roberts 2005-04-06 23:02 ` Richard Stallman 1 sibling, 0 replies; 37+ messages in thread From: Nick Roberts @ 2005-04-06 7:48 UTC (permalink / raw) Cc: rms, emacs-devel > The -Q option has saved me many hours debugging rediplay problems! If Kim finds this option useful then it surely makes sense to keep it? It presumably carries no overhead and, AFAIK, initial options aren't a limited resource . If no-one else finds it useful, why are we arguing about adding a long name for it? Nick ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 37+ messages in thread
* Re: emacs -Q not documented 2005-04-06 7:14 ` Kim F. Storm 2005-04-06 7:48 ` Nick Roberts @ 2005-04-06 23:02 ` Richard Stallman 1 sibling, 0 replies; 37+ messages in thread From: Richard Stallman @ 2005-04-06 23:02 UTC (permalink / raw) Cc: emacs-devel Furthermore, it means you cannot just put a breakpoint on (or anywhere inside) redisplay_internal and then execute some code to generate a specific error... The blinking cursor timer will trigger that breakpoint every second, making it practically impossible to debug such problems. It seems like a bug that blinking the cursur should require a real redisplay, if the buffer has not changed and point has not even moved. Can't this be done by redrawing the glyph instead? The -Q option has saved me many hours debugging rediplay problems! I think this should be split into two options. -Q, or --quick, should turn off use of both kinds of init file and the splash screen. --basic-display should turn off various display features, including the blinking cursor. -Q --bas would do them both. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 37+ messages in thread
* Re: emacs -Q not documented 2005-04-06 3:02 ` Richard Stallman 2005-04-06 7:14 ` Kim F. Storm @ 2005-04-06 8:45 ` Werner LEMBERG 2005-04-06 9:28 ` Kim F. Storm 1 sibling, 1 reply; 37+ messages in thread From: Werner LEMBERG @ 2005-04-06 8:45 UTC (permalink / raw) Cc: emacs-devel, storm > The difficulty in finding a long name for it reflected a lack of > apparent coherence of the functionality of the option. Nobody could > see what it was good for. That is why I thought of removing it or > changing it. Well, -Q has definitely its merits, especially for reporting bugs. After seeing this discussion I still think that my `--bare' proposal is not that bad: The -Q options really strips off all features you would normally like to have for daily work. Werner ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 37+ messages in thread
* Re: emacs -Q not documented 2005-04-06 8:45 ` Werner LEMBERG @ 2005-04-06 9:28 ` Kim F. Storm 2005-04-06 9:47 ` David Kastrup 2005-04-06 10:15 ` Andreas Schwab 0 siblings, 2 replies; 37+ messages in thread From: Kim F. Storm @ 2005-04-06 9:28 UTC (permalink / raw) Cc: rms, emacs-devel Werner LEMBERG <wl@gnu.org> writes: > Well, -Q has definitely its merits, especially for reporting bugs. > After seeing this discussion I still think that my `--bare' proposal > is not that bad: The -Q options really strips off all features you > would normally like to have for daily work. Yes, --bare-bones or --no-frills seem like good candidates, too. -- Kim F. Storm <storm@cua.dk> http://www.cua.dk ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 37+ messages in thread
* Re: emacs -Q not documented 2005-04-06 9:28 ` Kim F. Storm @ 2005-04-06 9:47 ` David Kastrup 2005-04-06 10:47 ` Kim F. Storm 2005-04-06 10:15 ` Andreas Schwab 1 sibling, 1 reply; 37+ messages in thread From: David Kastrup @ 2005-04-06 9:47 UTC (permalink / raw) Cc: rms, emacs-devel storm@cua.dk (Kim F. Storm) writes: > Werner LEMBERG <wl@gnu.org> writes: > >> Well, -Q has definitely its merits, especially for reporting bugs. >> After seeing this discussion I still think that my `--bare' proposal >> is not that bad: The -Q options really strips off all features you >> would normally like to have for daily work. > > Yes, --bare-bones or --no-frills seem like good candidates, too. --bare-bones seems ok. But things like menus are not "frills", and we don't want to spread that impression. I don't want to get bug reports from people that did not bother using the help menu or tutorial announced on the splash screen because they decided from the manual page that they were not the type of person interested in frills. -- David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 37+ messages in thread
* Re: emacs -Q not documented 2005-04-06 9:47 ` David Kastrup @ 2005-04-06 10:47 ` Kim F. Storm 0 siblings, 0 replies; 37+ messages in thread From: Kim F. Storm @ 2005-04-06 10:47 UTC (permalink / raw) Cc: rms, emacs-devel David Kastrup <dak@gnu.org> writes: > --bare-bones seems ok. I have installed --bare-bones as an alias for -Q. Case closed, I hope :-) -- Kim F. Storm <storm@cua.dk> http://www.cua.dk ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 37+ messages in thread
* Re: emacs -Q not documented 2005-04-06 9:28 ` Kim F. Storm 2005-04-06 9:47 ` David Kastrup @ 2005-04-06 10:15 ` Andreas Schwab 2005-04-06 11:58 ` David Kastrup 1 sibling, 1 reply; 37+ messages in thread From: Andreas Schwab @ 2005-04-06 10:15 UTC (permalink / raw) Cc: rms, emacs-devel storm@cua.dk (Kim F. Storm) writes: > Werner LEMBERG <wl@gnu.org> writes: > >> Well, -Q has definitely its merits, especially for reporting bugs. >> After seeing this discussion I still think that my `--bare' proposal >> is not that bad: The -Q options really strips off all features you >> would normally like to have for daily work. > > Yes, --bare-bones or --no-frills seem like good candidates, too. Since the option is primarily useful for debugging maybe its name should contain the word debug. Andreas. -- Andreas Schwab, SuSE Labs, schwab@suse.de SuSE Linux Products GmbH, Maxfeldstraße 5, 90409 Nürnberg, Germany Key fingerprint = 58CA 54C7 6D53 942B 1756 01D3 44D5 214B 8276 4ED5 "And now for something completely different." ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 37+ messages in thread
* Re: emacs -Q not documented 2005-04-06 10:15 ` Andreas Schwab @ 2005-04-06 11:58 ` David Kastrup 2005-04-06 13:31 ` Stefan Monnier 0 siblings, 1 reply; 37+ messages in thread From: David Kastrup @ 2005-04-06 11:58 UTC (permalink / raw) Cc: emacs-devel, rms, Kim F. Storm Andreas Schwab <schwab@suse.de> writes: > storm@cua.dk (Kim F. Storm) writes: > >> Werner LEMBERG <wl@gnu.org> writes: >> >>> Well, -Q has definitely its merits, especially for reporting bugs. >>> After seeing this discussion I still think that my `--bare' proposal >>> is not that bad: The -Q options really strips off all features you >>> would normally like to have for daily work. >> >> Yes, --bare-bones or --no-frills seem like good candidates, too. > > Since the option is primarily useful for debugging maybe its name > should contain the word debug. -debug-setup This could also set debug-on-error. -- David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 37+ messages in thread
* Re: emacs -Q not documented 2005-04-06 11:58 ` David Kastrup @ 2005-04-06 13:31 ` Stefan Monnier 0 siblings, 0 replies; 37+ messages in thread From: Stefan Monnier @ 2005-04-06 13:31 UTC (permalink / raw) Cc: Andreas Schwab, Kim F. Storm, rms, emacs-devel >>> Yes, --bare-bones or --no-frills seem like good candidates, too. >> Since the option is primarily useful for debugging maybe its name >> should contain the word debug. > -debug-setup My experience when programming is that functions shouldn't be named based on what they're used for, but based on what they do. I think the same should apply to command line options. Even if -Q is mostly useful for debugging, that doesn't mean its name should mention anything about debugging. I think the current --bare-bones is a better name, so I think we should close this discussion. We have better things to do. Stefan ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 37+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2005-04-06 23:02 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 37+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2005-03-29 14:28 emacs -Q not documented Werner LEMBERG [not found] ` <E1DH4IQ-00048v-Bw@fencepost.gnu.org> 2005-04-02 6:47 ` Werner LEMBERG 2005-04-02 9:58 ` David Kastrup 2005-04-02 11:02 ` Nick Roberts 2005-04-02 22:17 ` Miles Bader 2005-04-02 22:47 ` David Kastrup 2005-04-02 22:52 ` Kim F. Storm 2005-04-02 23:00 ` Miles Bader 2005-04-02 23:21 ` Henrik Enberg 2005-04-02 23:37 ` Miles Bader 2005-04-02 23:45 ` Nick Roberts 2005-04-03 21:20 ` Richard Stallman 2005-04-04 22:12 ` Miles Bader 2005-04-04 22:13 ` Miles Bader 2005-04-05 7:31 ` Kim F. Storm 2005-04-05 9:27 ` Miles Bader 2005-04-05 10:04 ` Kim F. Storm 2005-04-05 10:27 ` Miles Bader 2005-04-05 10:40 ` Miles Bader 2005-04-05 11:16 ` Kim F. Storm 2005-04-05 13:22 ` Robert J. Chassell 2005-04-05 13:44 ` David Kastrup 2005-04-05 14:05 ` Kim F. Storm 2005-04-05 14:09 ` David Kastrup 2005-04-05 14:44 ` Kim F. Storm 2005-04-05 14:53 ` David Kastrup 2005-04-06 3:02 ` Richard Stallman 2005-04-06 7:14 ` Kim F. Storm 2005-04-06 7:48 ` Nick Roberts 2005-04-06 23:02 ` Richard Stallman 2005-04-06 8:45 ` Werner LEMBERG 2005-04-06 9:28 ` Kim F. Storm 2005-04-06 9:47 ` David Kastrup 2005-04-06 10:47 ` Kim F. Storm 2005-04-06 10:15 ` Andreas Schwab 2005-04-06 11:58 ` David Kastrup 2005-04-06 13:31 ` Stefan Monnier
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this external index https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/emacs.git https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/emacs/org-mode.git This is an external index of several public inboxes, see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror all data and code used by this external index.