From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: David Kastrup Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Shift selection using interactive spec Date: Sat, 29 Mar 2008 16:09:34 +0100 Message-ID: <857iflpnwx.fsf@lola.goethe.zz> References: <87k5k69p92.fsf@stupidchicken.com> <87skyo5bvk.fsf@stupidchicken.com> <87skynrin5.fsf@stupidchicken.com> <87iqzju0lq.fsf@kfs-lx.rd.rdm> <851w5xx5ya.fsf@lola.goethe.zz> <87ve3993dt.fsf@jurta.org> <47EA37C7.7080502@gmail.com> <47EADCC4.2000207@gmail.com> <87iqz7wx7n.fsf@jurta.org> <851w5vti9y.fsf@lola.goethe.zz> <87tziqqtd0.fsf@jurta.org> <853aqarp06.fsf@lola.goethe.zz> <8763v5k8zq.fsf@jurta.org> <85ve35pqss.fsf@lola.goethe.zz> <47EE55F4.9030703@gmail.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1206803424 27132 80.91.229.12 (29 Mar 2008 15:10:24 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 29 Mar 2008 15:10:24 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Juri Linkov , jared@hpalace.com, rms@gnu.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: "Lennart Borgman \(gmail\)" Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Mar 29 16:10:55 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 1JfchU-0003o9-VR for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 29 Mar 2008 16:10:33 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Jfcgt-0006S8-9d for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 29 Mar 2008 11:09:55 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1Jfcgo-0006Rm-Ep for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 29 Mar 2008 11:09:50 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1Jfcgj-0006Ol-L6 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 29 Mar 2008 11:09:49 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Jfcgj-0006OY-HM for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 29 Mar 2008 11:09:45 -0400 Original-Received: from mail-in-01.arcor-online.net ([151.189.21.41]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1Jfcgf-0004D6-8H; Sat, 29 Mar 2008 11:09:42 -0400 Original-Received: from mail-in-08-z2.arcor-online.net (mail-in-08-z2.arcor-online.net [151.189.8.20]) by mail-in-01.arcor-online.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id B20C910463E; Sat, 29 Mar 2008 16:09:38 +0100 (CET) Original-Received: from mail-in-16.arcor-online.net (mail-in-16.arcor-online.net [151.189.21.56]) by mail-in-08-z2.arcor-online.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id A2B10212FAC; Sat, 29 Mar 2008 16:09:38 +0100 (CET) Original-Received: from lola.goethe.zz (dslb-084-061-014-217.pools.arcor-ip.net [84.61.14.217]) by mail-in-16.arcor-online.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 38815236E45; Sat, 29 Mar 2008 16:09:37 +0100 (CET) Original-Received: by lola.goethe.zz (Postfix, from userid 1002) id BC7421C4CE00; Sat, 29 Mar 2008 16:09:34 +0100 (CET) In-Reply-To: <47EE55F4.9030703@gmail.com> (Lennart Borgman's message of "Sat, 29 Mar 2008 15:45:08 +0100") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.0.60 (gnu/linux) X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV 0.92.1/6461/Sat Mar 29 13:07:46 2008 on mail-in-16.arcor-online.net X-Virus-Status: Clean X-detected-kernel: by monty-python.gnu.org: Linux 2.4-2.6 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:93803 Archived-At: "Lennart Borgman (gmail)" writes: > David Kastrup wrote: >> But there is no way to change the DOC string when one tacks a property >> onto the function. And that means that the DOC string change and the >> property tack-on are not inherently _synchronized_. And that is a bad >> idea. > > I think you are attaching the wrong point. What is important is not > only the doc string, but what the help system does. Of course the help > system can take care of this. In this respect there is no problem with > using a property here. > >> Again, this hides away part of the interactive behavior of a command to >> a different place. And again, it makes the mechanism depend on the >> _name_ (aka symbol) of the called function rather than its function >> definition. > > David, may I remind you that I asked you earlier about a way to change > the interactive spec in the function cell. You answered with a way to > instead attach a property to the symbol name. Lennart, may I remind you that this was in answer to your asking for an example after I pointed out that we _already_ have this interactive-form property which, misguided as it may be, obliterates the necessity for further things of its likeness which are not even remotely looking like they have anything to do with the interactive call. I am utterly fed up with this sort of game playing. I did _not_, I repeat _not_ at any point of time suggest that using _any_ property _including_ the interactive-form property for stealthily modifying a function's behavior inside of Emacs was a good idea. I merely pointed out that _if_ one wants to follow such an imprudent course, there is no necessity to _further_ mess around with properties. I regret giving you the example you requested since you apparently were only interested in fabricating a strawman from it. -- David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum