Re: Customize Rogue
Luc Teirlinck <[email protected]> Wed, 12 Mar 2003 18:13:59 -0600 (CST)
| Newsgroups | gmane.emacs.devel,gmane.emacs.customize |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Per Abrahamsen wrote: All of these cases are handled by Luc's set-activate. However, they are still bugs because we have decided they are bugs. Providing 'set-activate' is a convenient workaround for the bugs, which may mean the bugs will take longer to get fixed. I believe the latter is the reason why Richard (and others) are not terribly enthusiastic about set-activate, even in renamed form. (Assuming I understood correctly.) I personally believe the advantages of 'set-activate' outweigh the disadvantages though. Maybe these advantages can be achieved in other ways. I made a proposal to suggest that the function used by :set should normally not only be named, but actually use the same symbol as the variable. In other words, normally the :set function would be either set-default, funcall or a slight variation on funcall for variables of boolean type, which would behave exactly like minor modes. After sending that message, I saw that you were not on the CC list, but I assume that you read emacs-devel. Sincerely, Luc.