bug#9054: [External] : bug#9054: 24.0.50; show source in other window

[Drew Adams]

> > >> All I do is check whether there is such a thing-at-point.
> > >> If not, I don't enable the menu item for acting on that
> > >> kind of thing-at-point.
> > >
> > > If the thing-at-point is nowhere defined, its context
> > > menu should not show an entry for going to the
> > > definition of the thing-at-point.
> >
> > The choice between :visible and :enable is
> > just that: a choice.  Do what you want.
> 
> That's not the issue at hand, because the time it takes to decide
> whether a menu item should be :enable'd is as long as the time it
> takes to decide whether it should be :visible.  That time _is_ the
> issue.

Of course it takes the same amount of time - for
the same test.  That's not the issue at hand.

Please read the rest of what I wrote.  Martin
said you shouldn't show a menu item unless it
tests OK (in his case with a strict test that
takes too long, but that's beside the point
about :enable/:visible).

The text you quote responds to his statement
that an item shouldn't be shown if a test
fails.  I said there's no such rule; it's a
design choice whether to show a particular
item as disabled or to not show it at all.

We have :enable, and not only :visible, for
a reason.

Again, do what you want.  I've done what I
think is helpful, in my code.  And I've let
you know about that experience.  You're
welcome.