Re: how-many/count-matches for non-interactive use

[Kim F. Storm]

Stefan Monnier <address@hidden> writes:

>> Thinking more about it, I belive that the current behaviour of
>> interactive-p makes good sense in cases where it is used to determine
>> whether a command should do sit-for or output a message, as those are
>> typically not desireable during macro execution.
>
> Sit-for doesn't wait when executed from a macro.  

But it still does redisplay -- not really interesting if you execute a
macro N times with a prefix.

>                                                   As for messages you might
> be right in some (maybe even in many) cases but I doubt it matters much
> since unless the message is the last in the macro it will just be
> overwritten anyway.

Again, it does redisplay.


I think we should keep interactive-p as is.
I see no benefit from changing it or making it obsolete.

-- 
Kim F. Storm <address@hidden> http://www.cua.dk