A silly little request...

A silly little request...

[David Kastrup]

Could we have another autoloaded command from gud.el except just
gud-tooltip-mode?  Any old command?

The reason is that I frequently mistype
M-x gnu RET
(for starting gnus) and just type
M-x gu RET
which then calls gud-tooltip-mode with the current set of autoloads.
I don't even know what it does.  If "gu" happened to have more than
one completion, I would not inadvertantly call gud-tooltip-mode time
and again.

I realize that "preventing user stupidity" is not a pressing technical
concern, but nevertheless I'd be glad if somebody came up with a good
candidate command from gud.el that would be suitable for autoloading
as well.

-- 
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum

Re: A silly little request...

[Andreas Schwab]

David Kastrup <dak@gnu.org> writes:

> The reason is that I frequently mistype
> M-x gnu RET
> (for starting gnus) and just type
> M-x gu RET
> which then calls gud-tooltip-mode with the current set of autoloads.
> I don't even know what it does.

How about setting minibuffer-completion-confirm?

Andreas.

-- 
Andreas Schwab, SuSE Labs, schwab@suse.de
SuSE Linux Products GmbH, Maxfeldstraße 5, 90409 Nürnberg, Germany
PGP key fingerprint = 58CA 54C7 6D53 942B 1756  01D3 44D5 214B 8276 4ED5
"And now for something completely different."

Re: A silly little request...

[David Kastrup]

Andreas Schwab <schwab@suse.de> writes:

> David Kastrup <dak@gnu.org> writes:
>
>> The reason is that I frequently mistype
>> M-x gnu RET
>> (for starting gnus) and just type
>> M-x gu RET
>> which then calls gud-tooltip-mode with the current set of autoloads.
>> I don't even know what it does.
>
> How about setting minibuffer-completion-confirm?

Far too inconvenient.

-- 
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum

Re: A silly little request...

[Kim F. Storm]

David Kastrup <dak@gnu.org> writes:

> Could we have another autoloaded command from gud.el except just
> gud-tooltip-mode?  Any old command?

I often make the mistake of doing M-x gud when I meant M-x gdb,
as the buffers created by M-x gdb are called *gud  (really confusing).

I wish M-x gud => M-x gdb.

-- 
Kim F. Storm <storm@cua.dk> http://www.cua.dk

Re: A silly little request...

[Stefan Monnier]

> Could we have another autoloaded command from gud.el except just
> gud-tooltip-mode?  Any old command?

I'd argue to remove the autoload cookie on gud-tooltip-mode instead.
Why is it autoloaded?


        Stefan

Re: A silly little request...

[David Kastrup]

storm@cua.dk (Kim F. Storm) writes:

> David Kastrup <dak@gnu.org> writes:
>
>> Could we have another autoloaded command from gud.el except just
>> gud-tooltip-mode?  Any old command?
>
> I often make the mistake of doing M-x gud when I meant M-x gdb,
> as the buffers created by M-x gdb are called *gud  (really confusing).
>
> I wish M-x gud => M-x gdb.

Uh, that would acerbate my problem.  Maybe something like gud-start or
so?  Then we don't have a unique completion.

-- 
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum

Re: A silly little request...

[Piet van Oostrum]

>>>>> David Kastrup <dak@gnu.org> (DK) wrote:

>DK> Could we have another autoloaded command from gud.el except just
>DK> gud-tooltip-mode?  Any old command?

>DK> The reason is that I frequently mistype
>DK> M-x gnu RET
>DK> (for starting gnus) and just type
>DK> M-x gu RET
>DK> which then calls gud-tooltip-mode with the current set of autoloads.
>DK> I don't even know what it does.  If "gu" happened to have more than
>DK> one completion, I would not inadvertantly call gud-tooltip-mode time
>DK> and again.

>DK> I realize that "preventing user stupidity" is not a pressing technical
>DK> concern, but nevertheless I'd be glad if somebody came up with a good
>DK> candidate command from gud.el that would be suitable for autoloading
>DK> as well.

You could define a dummy command starting with "gu" in your .emacs.
-- 
Piet van Oostrum <piet@cs.uu.nl>
URL: http://www.cs.uu.nl/~piet [PGP 8DAE142BE17999C4]
Private email: piet@vanoostrum.org

Re: A silly little request...

[Jay Belanger]

Andreas Schwab <schwab@suse.de> writes:

> David Kastrup <dak@gnu.org> writes:
>
>> The reason is that I frequently mistype
>> M-x gnu RET
>> (for starting gnus) and just type
>> M-x gu RET
>> which then calls gud-tooltip-mode with the current set of autoloads.
>> I don't even know what it does.
>
> How about setting minibuffer-completion-confirm?

Or
(defalias 'gu 'gnus)

Jay

Re: A silly little request...

[David Kastrup]

Piet van Oostrum <piet@cs.uu.nl> writes:

>>>>>> David Kastrup <dak@gnu.org> (DK) wrote:
>
>>DK> Could we have another autoloaded command from gud.el except just
>>DK> gud-tooltip-mode?  Any old command?
>
>>DK> The reason is that I frequently mistype
>>DK> M-x gnu RET
>>DK> (for starting gnus) and just type
>>DK> M-x gu RET
>>DK> which then calls gud-tooltip-mode with the current set of autoloads.
>>DK> I don't even know what it does.  If "gu" happened to have more than
>>DK> one completion, I would not inadvertantly call gud-tooltip-mode time
>>DK> and again.
>
>>DK> I realize that "preventing user stupidity" is not a pressing technical
>>DK> concern, but nevertheless I'd be glad if somebody came up with a good
>>DK> candidate command from gud.el that would be suitable for autoloading
>>DK> as well.
>
> You could define a dummy command starting with "gu" in your .emacs.

Of course I could.  I just think it a bad idea to fix stuff privately
that feels like it would be an annoyance to a number of other people.
And I think vast clunky .emacs files are the work of the devil.  They
proliferate and get passed on between people who don't know what they
are doing.  .emacs should really only mirror personal taste, not
common sense.  Common sense should be catered for by Emacs, not
.emacs.

-- 
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum

Re: A silly little request...

[Nick Roberts]

 > > Could we have another autoloaded command from gud.el except just
 > > gud-tooltip-mode?  Any old command?
 > 
 > I'd argue to remove the autoload cookie on gud-tooltip-mode instead.
 > Why is it autoloaded?

So it can be enabled e.g in your .emacs, before starting a debug session.
I think very few people will mistype M-x gu RET for M-x gnu RET, so I
don't think it justifies changing.  David could always set gu as an alias
for gnus (or type a bit more slowly!).


Nick                                           http://www.inet.net.nz/~nickrob

Re: A silly little request...

[David Kastrup]

Nick Roberts <nickrob@snap.net.nz> writes:

>  > > Could we have another autoloaded command from gud.el except just
>  > > gud-tooltip-mode?  Any old command?
>  > 
>  > I'd argue to remove the autoload cookie on gud-tooltip-mode instead.
>  > Why is it autoloaded?
>
> So it can be enabled e.g in your .emacs, before starting a debug
> session.

But for that purpose it need not be marked as an autoloaded command.
An autoloaded function would be enough (and it would make more sense
to be able to customize it without needing to load it at .emacs time).
I don't think there is a point in being able to call gud-toolkit-mode
as a _command_ when no gud-session has been started yet.

> I think very few people will mistype M-x gu RET for M-x
> gnu RET, so I don't think it justifies changing.

Kim already mentioned that he gets tripped up as well by
gud-toolkit-mode (though in a different context).

> David could always set gu as an alias for gnus (or type a bit more
> slowly!).

Sure, so can everybody else, and that holds for everything tripping
people up while being "technically correct".

-- 
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum

Re: A silly little request...

[Nick Roberts]

 > > So it can be enabled e.g in your .emacs, before starting a debug
 > > session.
 > 
 > But for that purpose it need not be marked as an autoloaded command.
 > An autoloaded function would be enough (and it would make more sense
 > to be able to customize it without needing to load it at .emacs time).

It needs to be marked as an autoloaded command because it *is* a
command, and not just a function.

 > I don't think there is a point in being able to call gud-toolkit-mode
 > as a _command_ when no gud-session has been started yet.

Its gud-tooltip-mode actually, Mrs Malaprop.  Someone who uses it might
find it convenient not to have to enable it explicitly each time.  It
could be added to gdb-mode-hook by the user but thats more obscure.

 > > David could always set gu as an alias for gnus (or type a bit more
 > > slowly!).
 > 
 > Sure, so can everybody else, and that holds for everything tripping
 > people up while being "technically correct".

Perhaps you'd also like something to be done about number-to-register for when
you accidentally type M-x nu, etc. Anyway, it doesn't matter what I think, we
might as well wait for a decree.

Nick

Re: A silly little request...

[David Kastrup]

Nick Roberts <nickrob@snap.net.nz> writes:

>  > > So it can be enabled e.g in your .emacs, before starting a debug
>  > > session.
>  > 
>  > But for that purpose it need not be marked as an autoloaded command.
>  > An autoloaded function would be enough (and it would make more sense
>  > to be able to customize it without needing to load it at .emacs time).
>
> It needs to be marked as an autoloaded command because it *is* a
> command, and not just a function.

I don't see how this "because" applies.

>  > I don't think there is a point in being able to call
>  > gud-toolkit-mode as a _command_ when no gud-session has been
>  > started yet.
>
> Its gud-tooltip-mode actually, Mrs Malaprop.

I might be singing alto, but still that remark seems more Malaprop
than mine.

> Someone who uses it might find it convenient not to have to enable
> it explicitly each time.

Having it as an autoloaded function would be completely sufficient for
that.

> It could be added to gdb-mode-hook by the user but thats more
> obscure.

And quite better, since it would not necessitate loading gud.el unless
it actually got used.

>  > > David could always set gu as an alias for gnus (or type a bit more
>  > > slowly!).
>  > 
>  > Sure, so can everybody else, and that holds for everything
>  > tripping people up while being "technically correct".
>
> Perhaps you'd also like something to be done about
> number-to-register for when you accidentally type M-x nu,
> etc.

This does not seem to happen to me, and besides, the command has no
really unfathomable consequences: just type C-g and it aborts.

> Anyway, it doesn't matter what I think, we might as well wait for a
> decree.

I am not sure this warrants a decree.

-- 
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum