From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Richard Stallman Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: propose adding Icicles to Emacs Date: Sun, 01 Jul 2007 16:40:10 -0400 Message-ID: References: Reply-To: rms@gnu.org NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15 X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1183322485 6729 80.91.229.12 (1 Jul 2007 20:41:25 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 1 Jul 2007 20:41:25 +0000 (UTC) Cc: monnier@iro.umontreal.ca, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: "Drew Adams" Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sun Jul 01 22:41:24 2007 connect(): Connection refused 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 1I56EU-0002FO-PX for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 01 Jul 2007 22:41:23 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1I56EU-0000nU-Ad for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 01 Jul 2007 16:41:22 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1I56DO-0006s1-Ob for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 01 Jul 2007 16:40:14 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1I56DL-0006oO-Tq for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 01 Jul 2007 16:40:13 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1I56DL-0006nf-HT for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 01 Jul 2007 16:40:11 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([140.186.70.10]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1I56DL-0005Ik-6b for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 01 Jul 2007 16:40:11 -0400 Original-Received: from rms by fencepost.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1I56DK-0006b6-RX; Sun, 01 Jul 2007 16:40:10 -0400 In-reply-to: X-detected-kernel: Linux 2.6, seldom 2.4 (older, 4) 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:74144 Archived-At: If the same function is used to act on a single candidate and to act on all matching candidates, then you can get into trouble. The candidate action function takes a candidate and does something with it. You are talking about a function that takes a list of candidates and does something with that list. That is not the same function. I understand that's the case with your implementation. I've envisioned another implementation in which multi-command behavior works through a loop in call-interactively. Thus, multi-argument input will be equivalent to running the command over and over, with each argument. Except for one thing: the command can tell that it is being invoked for multi-command behavior. And it can do something different if it wants to. Do you see the idea now?