From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "Lennart Borgman (gmail)" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Specifying mode in file variables trouble Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2008 22:37:01 +0200 Message-ID: <48D9536D.50004@gmail.com> References: <48D44761.6000809@gmail.com> <87ljxny6n8.fsf@catnip.gol.com> <48D44C79.9020004@gmail.com> <48D63F30.8060102@gmail.com> <48D6E8FB.4070108@gmail.com> <48D79A25.7050000@gmail.com> <48D8BB40.6060806@gmail.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1222202294 21673 80.91.229.12 (23 Sep 2008 20:38:14 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2008 20:38:14 +0000 (UTC) Cc: dmhouse@gmail.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org, monnier@iro.umontreal.ca, aaron.s.hawley@gmail.com To: rms@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Sep 23 22:39:10 2008 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1KiEf7-0007iL-LC for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 23 Sep 2008 22:39:09 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:59890 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1KiEe5-0004vR-Oq for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 23 Sep 2008 16:38:05 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1KiEdC-0004dy-H3 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 23 Sep 2008 16:37:10 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1KiEdA-0004d9-UJ for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 23 Sep 2008 16:37:10 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=49681 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1KiEdA-0004d3-Mj for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 23 Sep 2008 16:37:08 -0400 Original-Received: from ch-smtp02.sth.basefarm.net ([80.76.149.213]:39506) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1KiEd9-0004jj-9D; Tue, 23 Sep 2008 16:37:07 -0400 Original-Received: from c83-254-151-87.bredband.comhem.se ([83.254.151.87]:60201 helo=[127.0.0.1]) by ch-smtp02.sth.basefarm.net with esmtp (Exim 4.68) (envelope-from ) id 1KiEd6-0007Kg-9S; Tue, 23 Sep 2008 22:37:05 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.8.1.9) Gecko/20071031 Thunderbird/2.0.0.9 Mnenhy/0.7.5.666 In-Reply-To: X-Enigmail-Version: 0.95.7 X-Antivirus: avast! (VPS 080923-0, 2008-09-23), Outbound message X-Antivirus-Status: Clean X-Originating-IP: 83.254.151.87 X-ACL-Warn: Too high rate of unknown addresses received from you X-Scan-Result: No virus found in message 1KiEd6-0007Kg-9S. X-Scan-Signature: ch-smtp02.sth.basefarm.net 1KiEd6-0007Kg-9S a40e8b865fdc30acdc4a38ab13be6231 X-detected-operating-system: by monty-python.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6? (barebone, rare!) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:104079 Archived-At: Richard M. Stallman wrote: > The "idle sorting" mechanism in majmodpri.el is asking for trouble. > Loading a file should _fully_ install the code in that file. To leave > _anything_ for later is unreliable. The "idle sorting" is there to avoid unnecessary sorting. It has a delay of 0 so for most interactive use there will be no problems. However I agree with your general point. If this is integrated in Emacs I hope it will be quite easy to find some points where sorting most be started if not done before. (This can perhaps be in addition to the "idle sorting".) > I'm not sure whether majmodpri is a useful feature, because I am not > convinced there is a real problem to be solved. What is a real case > of the problem, and is there another solution? I tried to describe the problem in the comment in majmodpri.el. Is that comment not clear? > But if we want such a facility, we should implement it right. The > right way is to insert these elements in the proper position the first > time. Unfortunately that can't be done. Please see the comment above.