Re: Request: Use message instead of message_with_string for user visible output?

[Jarek Czekalski <jarekczek@poczta.onet.pl>]

W dniu 2013-10-27 23:07, T.V. Raman pisze:
> My personal preference
> would be to not  to muck with command-error-function -- I played
> with it a bit last week -- it feels like too heavy a hammer, and
> at the end of the day might also produce too much output.

Raman, in this thread [1] we are given green light to improve 
command-error-function. Could you provide an example of the operation, 
that would be handled badly by command-error-function? For me it seems 
to be the best solution. For example it delivers "read only" message 
properly.

Further, if "key undefined" was also populated as an error-message, it 
would not require special handling by Emacspeak. This is all a song of 
the future (Emacs 25), but why not having a good plan?

By now you could start using command-error-function as if it was our 
private variable, later it would be made better accessible for packages 
and then we would adjust to new standards.

Jarek

[1] 
http://emacs.1067599.n5.nabble.com/command-error-function-default-handler-tp300931.html