From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Stefan Monnier Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Comments on setopt Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2022 08:15:10 -0500 Message-ID: References: <871r05rr2r.fsf@posteo.net> <871r04qxu4.fsf@gnus.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="8861"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/29.0.50 (gnu/linux) Cc: Philip Kaludercic , emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Lars Ingebrigtsen Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Tue Feb 15 14:17:13 2022 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1nJxhh-00023B-E9 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Tue, 15 Feb 2022 14:17:13 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:34136 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1nJxhg-0003e2-6b for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Tue, 15 Feb 2022 08:17:12 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:55684) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1nJxfq-0002qs-Rc for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 15 Feb 2022 08:15:19 -0500 Original-Received: from mailscanner.iro.umontreal.ca ([132.204.25.50]:7710) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1nJxfo-0003rz-1X for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 15 Feb 2022 08:15:17 -0500 Original-Received: from pmg2.iro.umontreal.ca (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by pmg2.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 8D09E80355; Tue, 15 Feb 2022 08:15:14 -0500 (EST) Original-Received: from mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (unknown [172.31.2.1]) by pmg2.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id EF967804F6; Tue, 15 Feb 2022 08:15:12 -0500 (EST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=iro.umontreal.ca; s=mail; t=1644930912; bh=6wLeEX/QUlzxgiP49ICte/5kL5m/b/eImXosan39DlA=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:References:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=Y6skJ1fT1ZfMXoxjXivhFo8C8h0tqc9n7lTlUcyucaTJasiv7FALgW1sNyRY+M3o1 YDMDHcQiP3jfYbVH8TpvjtYKrrY1W+gm/PiOOT7mMljDTSOWy+blDcpds4S3fpKv8Y fDCMqVWxdC33wrR3aEwZJJQ+bMSDCLzzr37bgruVGQnbkgwZxFrLK2pEAMazw11Qi5 906q0IZMKAUysAhLJixLHcN0WXNRtAYuzXoKUqi32t4bdFR0f65cKv/H3q8QkHgmIS osm+2khF0aiZSBEjwV+9ViOSsHzwbCMxWjg6tVAVBZOFjnm27WgTvwKCRQfkjXtQJs CXhHucKZ3lm1w== Original-Received: from pastel (unknown [45.72.237.157]) by mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id A192D120BB7; Tue, 15 Feb 2022 08:15:12 -0500 (EST) In-Reply-To: <871r04qxu4.fsf@gnus.org> (Lars Ingebrigtsen's message of "Tue, 15 Feb 2022 10:32:35 +0100") Received-SPF: pass client-ip=132.204.25.50; envelope-from=monnier@iro.umontreal.ca; helo=mailscanner.iro.umontreal.ca X-Spam_score_int: -42 X-Spam_score: -4.3 X-Spam_bar: ---- X-Spam_report: (-4.3 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:286322 Archived-At: >> - As `customize-set-variable' is being used directly, the "user" theme >> is modified, and a customisation might be mirrored in >> `custom-set-variables'. This can lead to the unfortunate situation >> where your setopt configuration is overriden by the >> `custom-set-variables', depending on when and how you load `custom-file' >> and when and how the `custom-set-variables' was generated. > > Isn't that the case no matter how these variables are set? It depends > on the order. No. If you set the variable with `setq` Custom will notice that it was set "outside of Custom" and thus refrain from saving the value into its `customize-set-variables` block. >> - While I don't mind it really, I can imagine that others might object >> to the "long" name, when compared to setq. Would a default alias like >> "seto" or "setc" be worth it or not? > I think `seto' is confusing, and `setc' doesn't really tell you > anything. The salient thing is that we're setting user option, not that > it's been defined by `defcustom'. FWIW, it took me a while to understand what "long name" Philip was talking about because I assumed `setopt` wouldn't be considered as long. ;-) Stefan