bug-gnu-emacs
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

bug#46594: [External] : bug#46594: Use short answers


From: Drew Adams
Subject: bug#46594: [External] : bug#46594: Use short answers
Date: Mon, 22 Feb 2021 17:13:28 +0000

> > As discussed in
> > https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-
> devel/2020-12/msg01915.html__;!!GqivPVa7Brio!PKOEWigE5iDrORKbgYbHKSe-
> DDgDExr74sBYZX3qybMC-I407gDeDkA8tD-MtISo$
> > here is an option that accomplishes the mapping of
> > (defalias 'yes-or-no-p 'y-or-n-p)
> 
> Makes sense to me -- having a variable instead of this extremely common
> defalias is better design.

Is it?  Jaywalking is extremely common (and I'm a major offender), but it's 
against the law for a reason: saves lives.  Speeding is extremely common, but 
speed limits are there for a reason.  Etc.

> > This is a related option, but I'm not sure if it should be mentioned
> > in the docstring.  Maybe a simple reference should be sufficient?
> 
> I think mentioning it in the `yes-or-no-p' doc string would be good.

I think that the doc for this option should explicitly discourage using the 
value that abbreviates, and say why.

It should say that `yes-or-no-p' is _intended_ to be used when it's thought 
that you should not respond too quickly.  At least point that out, for users to 
think about before customizing.

Otherwise, we're, in effect, encouraging `y-or-n-p' behavior, in the end.  
There's a reason Emacs has two such UIs.

Yes, whoever writes code that uses one of them might sometimes use judgment 
that a given user might disagree with.  But this option doesn't affect just one 
or two poor uses of such a function - it affects all of them.

Presumably this option is being added because there are apparently a lot of 
users who don't want to be slowed down by `yes-or-no-p'.  But that's exactly 
the point of `yes-or-no-p'.  

Users who really want to always get `y-or-n-p' behavior have gone to the 
trouble of adding an alias.  That's not a lot of trouble.  Maybe the fact that 
they've had to jump that extra hurdle was a good, not a bad, thing?

Users can turn off automatic backup of files, and all kinds of things that they 
might find as bothersome or cumbersome.  Such things are there to protect us 
from shooting ourselves in the foot - by default.  It's fine to have user 
options to turn off such protection (we have option `make-backup-files', for 
instance.  But it can also be a good idea for the doc to point out the possible 
downsides.





reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]