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: Shift selection using interactive spec Date: Sun, 30 Mar 2008 15:56:02 -0400 Message-ID: References: <87k5k69p92.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> <878x050yp0.fsf@jurta.org> <878x03ybyg.fsf@jurta.org> <871w5upcsc.fsf@jurta.org> <871w5t3svo.fsf@jurta.org> Reply-To: rms@gnu.org NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15 X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1206907052 9382 80.91.229.12 (30 Mar 2008 19:57:32 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 30 Mar 2008 19:57:32 +0000 (UTC) Cc: jared@hpalace.com, lennart.borgman@gmail.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Juri Linkov Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sun Mar 30 21:58:03 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 1Jg3fB-0002hk-FZ for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 30 Mar 2008 21:57:57 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Jg3eZ-0006N7-Pa for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 30 Mar 2008 15:57:19 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1Jg3dR-0005YN-98 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 30 Mar 2008 15:56:09 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1Jg3dM-0005V8-MG for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 30 Mar 2008 15:56:08 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Jg3dL-0005Ux-Sy for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 30 Mar 2008 15:56:04 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([140.186.70.10]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1Jg3dL-00065z-FP for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 30 Mar 2008 15:56:03 -0400 Original-Received: from rms by fencepost.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.67) (envelope-from ) id 1Jg3dK-0000QW-Rs; Sun, 30 Mar 2008 15:56:02 -0400 In-reply-to: <871w5t3svo.fsf@jurta.org> (message from Juri Linkov on Sun, 30 Mar 2008 04:05:31 +0300) X-detected-kernel: by monty-python.gnu.org: 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:93937 Archived-At: Then the second arg to `interactive' could be just a lambda with one argument with the value this function returns, e.g. I guess that is the best design option, for when you want to use a Lisp expression. But the simple case should be a string -- perhaps a format string. Stefan wrote: Yes, and if the use of `lambda' turns out to be a bit heavy, we can provide a handy alternative: if the return-spec is a list but not a function, then take the list as a function call with a missing argument: I don't like that idea, because an incomplete form like this seems like too fundamental a change in the Lisp way of doing things.