From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Kyle Meyer <kyle@kyleam.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] org-sort: Read compare-func in interactive calls
Date: Sun, 14 May 2017 09:45:08 -0400
Message-ID: <87fug7r1qz.fsf@kyleam.com>
References: <871srz5mbr.fsf@kyleam.com> <20170509194750.8974-1-kyle@kyleam.com>
	<87tw4r12ww.fsf@nicolasgoaziou.fr> <8737cax2tm.fsf@kyleam.com>
	<87h90q1rf6.fsf@nicolasgoaziou.fr> <87lgq0retg.fsf@kyleam.com>
	<87shk7zw08.fsf@nicolasgoaziou.fr>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Return-path: <emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:47433)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <kyle@kyleam.com>) id 1d9tpi-00049V-CH
	for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Sun, 14 May 2017 09:45:15 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <kyle@kyleam.com>) id 1d9tpe-0005Ce-FV
	for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Sun, 14 May 2017 09:45:14 -0400
Received: from pb-smtp2.pobox.com ([64.147.108.71]:53617
	helo=sasl.smtp.pobox.com)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32)
	(Exim 4.71) (envelope-from <kyle@kyleam.com>) id 1d9tpe-0005C7-9t
	for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Sun, 14 May 2017 09:45:10 -0400
In-Reply-To: <87shk7zw08.fsf@nicolasgoaziou.fr>
List-Id: "General discussions about Org-mode." <emacs-orgmode.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/options/emacs-orgmode>,
	<mailto:emacs-orgmode-request@gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-orgmode/>
List-Post: <mailto:emacs-orgmode@gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:emacs-orgmode-request@gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-orgmode>,
	<mailto:emacs-orgmode-request@gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org
Sender: "Emacs-orgmode"
	<emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>
To: Nicolas Goaziou <mail@nicolasgoaziou.fr>
Cc: Zhitao Gong <zhitaao.gong@gmail.com>, emacs-orgmode@gnu.org

Nicolas Goaziou <mail@nicolasgoaziou.fr> writes:

> Kyle Meyer <kyle@kyleam.com> writes:
>
>> I think (interactive "p"), or (interactive "P\np"), would be undesirable
>> because we'd be 1) changing the call signatures in a way that's not
>> backward compatible and 2) positioning an argument that shouldn't
>> concern most users toward the front of the argument list.
>
> I don't understand this. Why would using (interactive "p") instead of
> (interactive "P") would be incompatible?

I misunderstood, thinking you wanted to add an additional argument
rather than using (interactive "p") for WITH-CASE.

> AFAIU, the only difference is how the argument value is treated within
> the callee.

Won't using a numeric prefix argument change the behavior for both
interactive and Lisp calls?

As examples,

  * M-1 M-x org-sort-list is currently interpreted as a non-nil value
    for WITH-CASE.  Instead, it would be indistinguishable from M-x
    org-sort-list.

  * A Lisp caller can currently set WITH-CASE to any non-nil value.
    Using (interactive "p") for WITH-CASE, how do we distinguish a
    numeric argument passed for WITH-CASE from an interactive call?

Using an additional argument whose only purpose is to serve as a
interactive flag, which is what called-interactively-p's docstring
suggests, avoids these issues.

-- 
Kyle