bug#2805: 23.0.90; why is minibuffer-default-add-completions a command?

bug#2805: 23.0.90; why is minibuffer-default-add-completions a command?

[Drew Adams]

emacs -Q
 
Should `minibuffer-default-add-completions' really be an
interactive function? I don't see where that feature is
used anywhere.
 

In GNU Emacs 23.0.90.1 (i386-mingw-nt5.1.2600)
 of 2009-02-01 on SOFT-MJASON
Windowing system distributor `Microsoft Corp.', version 5.1.2600
configured using `configure --with-gcc (3.4)'

bug#2805: 23.0.90; why is minibuffer-default-add-completions a command?

[Juri Linkov]

> Should `minibuffer-default-add-completions' really be an
> interactive function? I don't see where that feature is
> used anywhere.

Hmm, I don't remember why it was implemented as interactive.
But now I see no reason why it should be interactive.

-- 
Juri Linkov
http://www.jurta.org/emacs/

bug#2805: 23.0.90; why is minibuffer-default-add-completions a command?

[Stefan Monnier]

>> Should `minibuffer-default-add-completions' really be an
>> interactive function? I don't see where that feature is
>> used anywhere.

> Hmm, I don't remember why it was implemented as interactive.
> But now I see no reason why it should be interactive.

It may have been convenient when testing it.  Please remove the
(interactive) thingy.


        Stefan

bug#2805: marked as done (23.0.90; why is minibuffer-default-add-completions a command?)

[Emacs bug Tracking System]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 916 bytes --]


Your message dated Sat, 28 Mar 2009 23:19:09 +0200
with message-id <873acxbb1u.fsf@jurta.org>
and subject line Re: bug#2805: 23.0.90; why is minibuffer-default-add-completions a command?
has caused the Emacs bug report #2805,
regarding 23.0.90; why is minibuffer-default-add-completions a command?
to be marked as done.

This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.

(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact owner@emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com
immediately.)


-- 
2805: http://emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=2805
Emacs Bug Tracking System
Contact owner@emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com with problems

[-- Attachment #2: Type: message/rfc822, Size: 3034 bytes --]

From: "Drew Adams" <drew.adams@oracle.com>
To: <emacs-pretest-bug@gnu.org>
Subject: 23.0.90; why is minibuffer-default-add-completions a command?
Date: Fri, 27 Mar 2009 15:22:36 -0700
Message-ID: <009a01c9af2a$88d7a190$0200a8c0@us.oracle.com>

emacs -Q
 
Should `minibuffer-default-add-completions' really be an
interactive function? I don't see where that feature is
used anywhere.
 

In GNU Emacs 23.0.90.1 (i386-mingw-nt5.1.2600)
 of 2009-02-01 on SOFT-MJASON
Windowing system distributor `Microsoft Corp.', version 5.1.2600
configured using `configure --with-gcc (3.4)'





[-- Attachment #3: Type: message/rfc822, Size: 2075 bytes --]

From: Juri Linkov <juri@jurta.org>
To: Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca>
Cc: 2805-done@emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com, Drew Adams <drew.adams@oracle.com>
Subject: Re: bug#2805: 23.0.90; why is minibuffer-default-add-completions a command?
Date: Sat, 28 Mar 2009 23:19:09 +0200
Message-ID: <873acxbb1u.fsf@jurta.org>

>>> Should `minibuffer-default-add-completions' really be an
>>> interactive function? I don't see where that feature is
>>> used anywhere.
>
>> Hmm, I don't remember why it was implemented as interactive.
>> But now I see no reason why it should be interactive.
>
> It may have been convenient when testing it.  Please remove the
> (interactive) thingy.

Done.

-- 
Juri Linkov
http://www.jurta.org/emacs/