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: Thu, 27 Mar 2008 15:39:56 +0100 Message-ID: <8663v844eb.fsf@lola.quinscape.zz> References: <87k5k69p92.fsf@stupidchicken.com> <87hcf6ratt.fsf@stupidchicken.com> <878x0if9ul.fsf@stupidchicken.com> <87od9e9gnx.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> <854pasvedl.fsf@lola.goethe.zz> <47EB58A8.1040607@gmail.com> <86od904kzo.fsf@lola.quinscape.zz> <47EBA7D2.2010100@gmail.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1206628995 19048 80.91.229.12 (27 Mar 2008 14:43:15 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 27 Mar 2008 14:43:15 +0000 (UTC) Cc: juri@jurta.org, 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 Thu Mar 27 15:43:36 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 1JetID-0004If-RJ for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 27 Mar 2008 15:41:27 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JetHE-0003y6-Mx for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 27 Mar 2008 10:40:24 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1JetGq-0003qy-8H for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 27 Mar 2008 10:40:00 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1JetGo-0003qa-OY for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 27 Mar 2008 10:39:59 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JetGo-0003qX-J4 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 27 Mar 2008 10:39:58 -0400 Original-Received: from mail.quinscape.de ([212.29.44.217]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1JetGn-0008WJ-Ka for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 27 Mar 2008 10:39:58 -0400 Original-Received: (qmail-ldap/ctrl 12937 invoked from network); 27 Mar 2008 14:39:55 -0000 Original-Received: from unknown (HELO lola.quinscape.zz) ([10.0.3.43]) (envelope-sender ) by ns.quinscape.de (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP for ; 27 Mar 2008 14:39:54 -0000 Original-Received: by lola.quinscape.zz (Postfix, from userid 1001) id 1C42A8FC65; Thu, 27 Mar 2008 15:39:56 +0100 (CET) In-Reply-To: <47EBA7D2.2010100@gmail.com> (Lennart Borgman's message of "Thu, 27 Mar 2008 14:57:38 +0100") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.0.60 (gnu/linux) X-AntiVirus: checked by AntiVir MailGate (version: 2.1.3-2; AVE: 7.6.0.75; VDF: 7.0.3.83; host: quinx) X-detected-kernel: by monty-python.gnu.org: Linux 2.6 (newer, 3) 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:93639 Archived-At: "Lennart Borgman (gmail)" writes: > David Kastrup wrote: >> "Lennart Borgman (gmail)" writes: >> >>> David Kastrup wrote: >>>> "Lennart Borgman (gmail)" writes: >>>> >>>>> Richard Stallman wrote: >>>>>> I think that `interactive' codes are much better than symbol properties >>>>>> for defining the meaning of a command. >>>>> Yes, but the problem here is rather that you may need to redefine >>>>> which commands should deactivate the mark. Doing that with a symbol >>>>> property makes it much more flexible. >>>> Read "flexible" as "conveniently hot-patchable around things not >>>> designed for it". We have a policy not to use advice (another hotpatch >>>> facility) for components distributed as part of Emacs because we want >>>> all information pertaining to a particular function accessible and >>>> readable from a single location in a clear manner. >>>> >>>> I don't see this any different. If there is a need for a user to >>>> hot-patch around functions not designed for it, advice is still >>>> available. >>> But I believe this will only affect things on the command level. Is >>> not that a big difference? >> >> The "command level" is distinguished by interactive forms. So there is >> a difference in that we _already_ have a standard location where the >> command level behavior is determined, namely the interactive form. >> >> If people really want to hot-patch command behavior manually by poking >> around with properties rather than advice, the 'interactive-form >> property already provides enough leeway for that. >> >> I don't see that we want to open the floodgates for all sort of bypasses >> for command-specific properties attached to something other than the >> interactive form. > > Can you provide an example of how to change the interactive form for > an existing function (without using advice of course)? (put 'forward-char 'interactive-form '(interactive "*p")) Seemingly has no effect (except on explicit interactive-form calls), but that would seem more like a bug than a principal problem. -- David Kastrup