From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Drew Adams Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#17446: 24.4.50; What is the situation around `called-interactively-p'? Date: Fri, 9 May 2014 16:34:31 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <3f7dbef0-378a-4c67-8355-4e45fd0446e7@default> References: <87tx8z6sp2.fsf@gmail.com> <819a6ab8-db8e-4176-a778-02218f08e7af@default> <6e5610f3-d741-4d61-903c-a8f3aa8f46fd@default> <87siojasqx.fsf@web.de> <87r442x00n.fsf@gmail.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1399678601 18456 80.91.229.3 (9 May 2014 23:36:41 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 9 May 2014 23:36:41 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Michael Heerdegen , 17446@debbugs.gnu.org To: Stefan Monnier , Thierry Volpiatto Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat May 10 01:36:33 2014 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@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 1WiuLB-0002if-F8 for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Sat, 10 May 2014 01:36:33 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:54867 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WiuLB-0002aP-1G for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Fri, 09 May 2014 19:36:33 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:34892) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WiuJr-0000sg-V8 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 09 May 2014 19:35:20 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WiuJi-0004KL-UQ for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 09 May 2014 19:35:11 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.43]:40057) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WiuJi-0004Jl-Rv for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 09 May 2014 19:35:02 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1WiuJi-00012t-0X for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 09 May 2014 19:35:02 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Drew Adams Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Fri, 09 May 2014 23:35:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 17446 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: Original-Received: via spool by 17446-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B17446.13996784853992 (code B ref 17446); Fri, 09 May 2014 23:35:01 +0000 Original-Received: (at 17446) by debbugs.gnu.org; 9 May 2014 23:34:45 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:57408 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1WiuJQ-00012J-Ty for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 09 May 2014 19:34:45 -0400 Original-Received: from userp1040.oracle.com ([156.151.31.81]:41391) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1WiuJN-000122-D1 for 17446@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 09 May 2014 19:34:42 -0400 Original-Received: from acsinet22.oracle.com (acsinet22.oracle.com [141.146.126.238]) by userp1040.oracle.com (Sentrion-MTA-4.3.2/Sentrion-MTA-4.3.2) with ESMTP id s49NYXS3014230 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Fri, 9 May 2014 23:34:34 GMT Original-Received: from aserz7022.oracle.com (aserz7022.oracle.com [141.146.126.231]) by acsinet22.oracle.com (8.14.4+Sun/8.14.4) with ESMTP id s49NYWHH024780 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Fri, 9 May 2014 23:34:33 GMT Original-Received: from abhmp0009.oracle.com (abhmp0009.oracle.com [141.146.116.15]) by aserz7022.oracle.com (8.14.4+Sun/8.14.4) with ESMTP id s49NYWSA024773; Fri, 9 May 2014 23:34:32 GMT In-Reply-To: X-Priority: 3 X-Mailer: Oracle Beehive Extensions for Outlook 2.0.1.8 (707110) [OL 12.0.6691.5000 (x86)] X-Source-IP: acsinet22.oracle.com [141.146.126.238] X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 3.x X-Received-From: 140.186.70.43 X-BeenThere: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org List-Id: "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.bugs:88844 Archived-At: > > How 'bout the patch below, > BTW, for older Emacsen, you can probably use a hack along the lines of > the guaranteed 100% untested code below: Not sure I understand how any of this will help the use cases we mentioned. Is the idea that `repeat-complex-command' will, instead of doing (eval newcmd), do something like this? (eval `(funcall-interactively ,(car newcmd) ,@(cdr newcmd))) For the case in bug #14136, where NEWCMD is (count-words nil nil), this would mean (funcall-interactively 'count-words nil nil). (Maybe an `apply-interactively' would be handier here?) In any case, I will wait to see how this changes the `repeat-complex-command' code and then do likewise for my code, which is similar.