From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Luc Teirlinck Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel,gmane.emacs.customize Subject: Re: Customize Rogue Date: Thu, 13 Mar 2003 22:21:16 -0600 (CST) Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+emacs-devel=quimby.gnus.org@gnu.org Message-ID: <200303140421.WAA16774@eel.dms.auburn.edu> References: <20030309185419.2506.LEKTU@terra.es> NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1047615785 26146 80.91.224.249 (14 Mar 2003 04:23:05 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 14 Mar 2003 04:23:05 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+emacs-devel=quimby.gnus.org@gnu.org Fri Mar 14 05:23:02 2003 Return-path: Original-Received: from quimby.gnus.org ([80.91.224.244]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 18tgik-0006nZ-00 for ; Fri, 14 Mar 2003 05:23:02 +0100 Original-Received: from monty-python.gnu.org ([199.232.76.173]) by quimby.gnus.org with esmtp (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian)) id 18th6m-0007XZ-00 for ; Fri, 14 Mar 2003 05:47:52 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.10.13) id 18tghs-0001tZ-03 for emacs-devel@quimby.gnus.org; Thu, 13 Mar 2003 23:22:08 -0500 Original-Received: from list by monty-python.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.10.13) id 18tghS-0001sH-00 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 13 Mar 2003 23:21:42 -0500 Original-Received: from mail by monty-python.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.10.13) id 18tghQ-0001pO-00 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 13 Mar 2003 23:21:41 -0500 Original-Received: from manatee.dms.auburn.edu ([131.204.53.104]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.10.13) id 18tggF-00010m-00 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 13 Mar 2003 23:20:27 -0500 Original-Received: from eel.dms.auburn.edu (eel.dms.auburn.edu [131.204.53.108]) h2E4KKB23209; Thu, 13 Mar 2003 22:20:21 -0600 (CST) Original-Received: (from teirllm@localhost) by eel.dms.auburn.edu (8.9.3+Sun/8.9.3) id WAA16774; Thu, 13 Mar 2003 22:21:16 -0600 (CST) X-Authentication-Warning: eel.dms.auburn.edu: teirllm set sender to teirllm@dms.auburn.edu using -f Original-To: abraham@dina.kvl.dk In-reply-to: (message from Per Abrahamsen on Thu, 13 Mar 2003 22:59:42 +0100) Original-cc: emacs-custom@sunsite.dk X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1b5 Precedence: list List-Id: Emacs development discussions. List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: List-Unsubscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+emacs-devel=quimby.gnus.org@gnu.org Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:12350 gmane.emacs.customize:54 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:12350 Per Abrahamsen wrote: Uh, does initsplit.el use multiple custom-set-variables? That is guarenteed to cause problems whenever the user tries to modify the variables. If so, it *really* should use setq (or a set-activate woralike) instead. Maybe the existence if initsplit.el is an argument for including set-activate in Emacs, to make it easier to write such tools. It is hard for automated tools to read doctrings to find the proper Lisp function to set the variable. Even if the current custom-set-variables and custom-set-faces forms would be replaced by a series of custom-setq calls (which would be a big plus for people who like to combine use of Custom with Lisp based customizations) there still would, as is apparent from David's messages, be a legitimate need to perform customizations that are outside of Custom's control (and hence could not be done using custom-setq). If done by hand, it is sufficient if a Lisp alternative is available and mentioned in the documentation string, although it would help if the alternative was a function with the same name as the variable (as is the case for minor modes), to avoid having to remember two different names for exactly the same functionality and to eliminate the need for a C-h v. I do not know whether it would be possible to standardize such a naming convention sufficiently to make it safe for automated use. If not, then I believe that there is indeed a need for set-activate. It is possible to abuse that function. But the documentation string could make clear what it is intended to be used for and what not. In particular, the documentation string would clearly state that it is definitely not meant to set parameters from Lisp code, but instead for customizations that are outside Custom's control, mainly in automated use. It is a very small function, it is not exactly going to "bloat" custom.el. Sincerely, Luc.