[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: doc elisp intro cross reference fixes

From: Stefan Monnier
Subject: Re: doc elisp intro cross reference fixes
Date: 19 Nov 2003 16:15:55 -0500
User-agent: Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.3.50

> I disagree.  It is a useful distinction, and programmers can take
> advantage of it to prevent users from setting variables in a way that
> they shouldn't (and thence submitting bug reports when they don't get
> the desired effect).

Can you give concrete examples where the distinction makes sense ?

> I don't find the explanation of Variable Definitions in the Emacs Lisp
> manual that Luc cited to be too subtle.

How many elisp programmers know about it and understand it ?

> And I don't understand what startup vs. session time has to do with it:
> it only has to do with whether set-variable can be used interactively.

That was the distinction proposed by Luc.

> set-variable and customize are independent mechanisms that are enabled
> by a doc string convention and the custom-* symbol properties
> respectively, and as a programmer I'd like to retain control over those
> mechanisms.

Why should they be independent mechanisms ?
What is the benefit ?  Why should something be only allowed via M-x
customize-variable but not via M-x set-variable (and vice-versa, BTW) ?

As a programmer, the distinction seems very faint and I have a hard time
coming up with cases where it could make sense to prevent one use
and allow the other.

As a user it just makes for inconsistency where some variables can be set
via M-x set-variable while others need M-x customize-variable.


reply via email to

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