From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "Drew Adams" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#5105: 23.1; doc string of facemenu-set-face Date: Mon, 1 Aug 2011 14:47:47 -0700 Message-ID: References: <3750B6C4FBBD4720926A2FC57778497F@us.oracle.com> <46B162590B174FA18FC402384C600E59@us.oracle.com> <4D4C3BF277534D7ABBFD7434325A8A1D@us.oracle.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1312235329 27899 80.91.229.12 (1 Aug 2011 21:48:49 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 1 Aug 2011 21:48:49 +0000 (UTC) Cc: 'Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen' , 5105@debbugs.gnu.org To: "'Stefan Monnier'" Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Aug 01 23:48:45 2011 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([140.186.70.17]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Qo0Ls-0004gF-8e for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Mon, 01 Aug 2011 23:48:44 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:60546 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Qo0Lr-0007js-Sl for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Mon, 01 Aug 2011 17:48:43 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]:46436) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Qo0Lp-0007jh-6H for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 01 Aug 2011 17:48:42 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Qo0Lm-0004Xc-UH for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 01 Aug 2011 17:48:41 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.43]:49789) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Qo0Lm-0004XX-Ks for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 01 Aug 2011 17:48:38 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Qo0M9-0000d1-RB; Mon, 01 Aug 2011 17:49:01 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: "Drew Adams" Original-Sender: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Resent-To: owner@debbugs.gnu.org Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Mon, 01 Aug 2011 21:49:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 5105 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: wontfix Original-Received: via spool by 5105-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B5105.13122353092375 (code B ref 5105); Mon, 01 Aug 2011 21:49:01 +0000 Original-Received: (at 5105) by debbugs.gnu.org; 1 Aug 2011 21:48:29 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Qo0Lc-0000cF-RH for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 01 Aug 2011 17:48:29 -0400 Original-Received: from rcsinet15.oracle.com ([148.87.113.117]) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Qo0La-0000c8-5N for 5105@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 01 Aug 2011 17:48:27 -0400 Original-Received: from rtcsinet22.oracle.com (rtcsinet22.oracle.com [66.248.204.30]) by rcsinet15.oracle.com (Switch-3.4.4/Switch-3.4.4) with ESMTP id p71LluBa002633 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Mon, 1 Aug 2011 21:47:59 GMT Original-Received: from acsmt357.oracle.com (acsmt357.oracle.com [141.146.40.157]) by rtcsinet22.oracle.com (8.14.4+Sun/8.14.4) with ESMTP id p71Llqui001542 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Mon, 1 Aug 2011 21:47:53 GMT Original-Received: from abhmt105.oracle.com (abhmt105.oracle.com [141.146.116.57]) by acsmt357.oracle.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with ESMTP id p71LlkTY018030; Mon, 1 Aug 2011 16:47:47 -0500 Original-Received: from dradamslap1 (/130.35.178.194) by default (Oracle Beehive Gateway v4.0) with ESMTP ; Mon, 01 Aug 2011 14:47:46 -0700 X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 11 In-Reply-To: Thread-Index: AcxQkeRxR+GtQSYhQKKiBa28ukWPRQAAPbKQ X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.6109 X-Source-IP: rtcsinet22.oracle.com [66.248.204.30] X-CT-RefId: str=0001.0A090203.4E371F10.00B9,ss=1,re=0.000,fgs=0 X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.11 Precedence: list Resent-Date: Mon, 01 Aug 2011 17:49:01 -0400 X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 1) X-Received-From: 140.186.70.43 X-BeenThere: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org List-Id: "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.bugs:49778 Archived-At: > >> > What? Why are you arbitrarily deciding that? Why not > >> > assume that allowing a string is a good thing, a > >> > purposeful design decision? > >> > >> Because a good programmer knows that it's obviously not a > >> good idea to encourage the caller to use a string here. > > > > It might be obvious to what you call good programmers, but > > how about giving a _reason_, for us mere mortals? > > How 'bout the other way around: give me a reason to accept strings. You're the one claiming that there is a good (even _obvious_) reason not to. What's the reason, if it's so obvious? > >>> We have many places in Emacs where we allow an arg to be > >>> either a thing or its name. Think of all of the BUFFER args > >>> that can be a buffer or a buffer name. > > > > What do the "good programmers" say about the design in > > those cases? Is it "obviously not a good idea" also? > > Very often, yes it's also a bad idea. Why? And when? ("Very often" doesn't say much - how about a specific context where it is a bad idea, since there are supposedly so many.) How about a reason or two to back up all the hand-waving claims about "good" and "bad"? > At least for buffers we have a guarantee that there is a > one-to-one mapping between (live) buffers and buffer names, > so for buffers it's a bit less bad. "Less bad"? You haven't said what is bad about it. And what about faces? Can a given face have two different names? We have `face-name' the same way we have `buffer-name'. At least there is nothing documented AFAICT about `face-name' being a relation and not a function. If F is a face, under what circumstances will (face-name F) give different names at different times?