From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "Juanma Barranquero" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: doc on define-minor-mode hook variable(s) Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2007 11:55:00 +0100 Message-ID: References: <87r75gkwbd.fsf-monnier+emacs@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1193655318 31204 80.91.229.12 (29 Oct 2007 10:55:18 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2007 10:55:18 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: "Kevin Rodgers" Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Oct 29 11:55:21 2007 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 1ImSH7-0003aj-M0 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 29 Oct 2007 11:55:17 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1ImSGy-00085T-L2 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 29 Oct 2007 06:55:08 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1ImSGv-00085O-F6 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 29 Oct 2007 06:55:05 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1ImSGt-00084o-4O for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 29 Oct 2007 06:55:04 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1ImSGs-00084T-Tp for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 29 Oct 2007 06:55:02 -0400 Original-Received: from rv-out-0910.google.com ([209.85.198.191]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1ImSGs-0007Bp-6l for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 29 Oct 2007 06:55:02 -0400 Original-Received: by rv-out-0910.google.com with SMTP id c27so1382613rvf for ; Mon, 29 Oct 2007 03:55:00 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; bh=G1XNliZt8Q9W8wb0YMc0xwr7sqeRcVMZ7GJode434JM=; b=LWwJi7XTBz0+us4ML5NpI2HGnmCeKV0MppjX71Bd+mpiCX5IU+UEoJJKbhIRprwg77vmuF+14SsxKy8oImFXZVnPsjuthzQDrLQNi5TvdEGVUF4d65hKZ+nQHO0ho5XEiwb3DT0G5za9o9/XVPDaHSQDgDgxjfXuGL7JmPRDVc0= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=axbxIlZtIxwq7seTw4oDjd3LaJdTzCvvBnBIeWgFIJ8LYnUwGMFj3c5e3WzT+Nt92NlkHdslPbGT2vyV0BsYyJN6g+KI43HGXhLv0nGEjkx68ItE1fCvS0v4d5LcFO1TULQFh7MtaQ76gA5rkyfHA+0bjF3ofZ2/KT4/DWX6U90= Original-Received: by 10.114.195.19 with SMTP id s19mr1548075waf.1193655300170; Mon, 29 Oct 2007 03:55:00 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: by 10.115.72.13 with HTTP; Mon, 29 Oct 2007 03:55:00 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: Content-Disposition: inline X-detected-kernel: by monty-python.gnu.org: Linux 2.6 (newer, 2) 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:82069 Archived-At: On 3/8/06, Kevin Rodgers wrote: > (defmacro defhook (symbol &rest optional-args) > "Define SYMBOL as a hook. [...] > Just kidding, Hmm. Well, kidding or not, that could be useful (yes, I know that many people will consider it utterly unnecessary :-). I'd love a defhook that would get a ":hook-type SOMEVALUE" keyword argument and would do (put my-hook 'hook SOMEVALUE) where SOMEVALUE could be as simple `t' (normal) or `special', or perhaps something more sophisticate indicating the expected use (number or arguments, whether it will return something or not). No, I don't have a use case for the "more sophisticate" case (though it could conceivably be used by add-hook to check validity of functions added). But certainly having all hooks marked with a property would have uses, the first one getting rid of `unload-feature-special-hooks'. Just dreaming, Juanma