bug#14925: 24.3.50; `image-dired.el' code (minor)

[Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca>]

> 1. `image-dired-dired-file-marked-p' uses regexp "^ .*$", which I think
> is the same as "^ " (which is simpler).

It's similar, except for (match-end 0) and the position of point after
re-search-forward.  I haven't looked at the code to see if the
difference matters.

> I also wonder why it does not just use `dired-re-mark'.

No idea.

> 2. Commands that act on the marked files should perhaps follow the
> naming convention used in dired.el, dired-aux.el, and dired-x.el:
> `*-do-*'.  Thus perhaps rename `image-dired-dired-comment-files',
> `image-dired-tag-files', `image-dired-delete-tag',
> `image-dired-display-thumbs', `image-dired-copy-with-exif-file-name',
> `image-dired-dired-edit-comment-and-tags', and
> `image-dired-create-thumbs'.

> The equivalent Dired command that acts on the current file only, when
> available, is named similarly, but without the `*-do-*' part.

> 3. Those commands do not treat parameter ARG the same way as do the
> Dired `*-do-*' commands.  For the image-dired commands, ARG is
> essentially boolean (and should thus have a name that reflects that).
> Wouldn't it be better for it to be the `prefix-numeric-value' and let
> you act on the next ARG files?  That would give users more flexibility
> and provide a more consistent UI.  Is there a downside I am missing?

2 and 3 sound like good ideas.


        Stefan