[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: how-many/count-matches for non-interactive use
From: |
Richard Stallman |
Subject: |
Re: how-many/count-matches for non-interactive use |
Date: |
Sun, 17 Oct 2004 12:07:30 -0400 |
I doubt anybody used interactive-p rather than an extra argument just
because of the subtle difference w.r.t keyboard macros. I expect 99% of the
people who used interactive-p haven't even thought about the interaction
with keyboard macros.
I agree with you, but I think we should check the existing calls
to make sure that we're not breaking some while we fix others.
- Re: how-many/count-matches for non-interactive use, (continued)
- Re: how-many/count-matches for non-interactive use, Luc Teirlinck, 2004/10/24
- Re: how-many/count-matches for non-interactive use, Richard Stallman, 2004/10/23
- Re: how-many/count-matches for non-interactive use, Richard Stallman, 2004/10/23
- Re: how-many/count-matches for non-interactive use, John Paul Wallington, 2004/10/23
- Re: how-many/count-matches for non-interactive use, Luc Teirlinck, 2004/10/21
- Re: how-many/count-matches for non-interactive use, Richard Stallman, 2004/10/23
- Re: how-many/count-matches for non-interactive use, Luc Teirlinck, 2004/10/23
- Re: how-many/count-matches for non-interactive use, Kim F. Storm, 2004/10/18
- Re: how-many/count-matches for non-interactive use,
Richard Stallman <=