From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Richard Stallman Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: customize Date: Mon, 29 Jul 2002 19:00:00 -0600 (MDT) Sender: emacs-devel-admin@gnu.org Message-ID: <200207300100.g6U100I14581@aztec.santafe.edu> References: <200207111201.g6BC1OM16938@aztec.santafe.edu> <15680.26449.937153.817907@localhost.localdomain> <200207271853.g6RIrdt10834@aztec.santafe.edu> Reply-To: rms@gnu.org NNTP-Posting-Host: localhost.gmane.org X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1027990852 1547 127.0.0.1 (30 Jul 2002 01:00:52 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 30 Jul 2002 01:00:52 +0000 (UTC) Cc: jeff.dwork@amd.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org Return-path: Original-Received: from quimby.gnus.org ([80.91.224.244]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1 (Debian)) id 17ZLNa-0000Oh-00 for ; Tue, 30 Jul 2002 03:00:50 +0200 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([199.232.76.164]) by quimby.gnus.org with esmtp (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian)) id 17ZLf3-0004xT-00 for ; Tue, 30 Jul 2002 03:18:54 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=fencepost.gnu.org) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 17ZLNz-0006JC-00; Mon, 29 Jul 2002 21:01:15 -0400 Original-Received: from pele.santafe.edu ([192.12.12.119]) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 17ZLMo-00065s-00; Mon, 29 Jul 2002 21:00:02 -0400 Original-Received: from aztec.santafe.edu (aztec [192.12.12.49]) by pele.santafe.edu (8.11.6+Sun/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g6U10CB01958; Mon, 29 Jul 2002 19:00:12 -0600 (MDT) Original-Received: (from rms@localhost) by aztec.santafe.edu (8.10.2+Sun/8.9.3) id g6U100I14581; Mon, 29 Jul 2002 19:00:00 -0600 (MDT) X-Authentication-Warning: aztec.santafe.edu: rms set sender to rms@aztec using -f Original-To: eddy@opera.no In-Reply-To: (message from Edward Welbourne on Mon, 29 Jul 2002 13:17:14 +0200) Errors-To: emacs-devel-admin@gnu.org X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.11 Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: Emacs development discussions. List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:6158 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:6158 > I documented custom-face, but I don't see a reason to change the > default to use a different file. Jeff was discussing customisation of custom-file, not custom-face. It was custom-file that I documented. I wrote the wrong name in the message. * Database reason: one file then contains only customize's actions, making it much easier to keep track of which pieces of one's config come from where. It is easy enough to distinguish--the stuff written by Customize is compact, distinctive, and clearly labeled. * Priority/ordering reason: customize adds things to the end of its file: this is sensible for it, but potentially bad for elisp which needs to be executed after customizations; using a separate file for customize lets my ~/.emacs load the customize part early, late or in between, at my option, rather than having it always be last. There appears to be some controversy about whether this is really true. Part of the controversy may be that your description of the problem is heavy on emotions and the facts are not clear. > After it is there, you can add stuff in ~/.emacs after it. and get a layer-cake of intermingled fragments, some of one's own construction, others added by customize Could you show an example of this? As far as I know, customize writes all its definitions for variables in a single sexp, and all its specs for faces in a single sexp, and this can't produce very many layers. If you show me what the problem looks like, maybe I can change Customize to edit the file in a way that is more convenient. * Byte-compilation: putting it all in a separate .el file provides for the possibility of byte-compiling the customization elisp. You can byte-compile .emacs, so is this really an advantage?