[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: run-hooks vs. run-mode-hooks.
From: |
Miles Bader |
Subject: |
Re: run-hooks vs. run-mode-hooks. |
Date: |
Sat, 28 May 2005 06:43:23 +0900 |
Lute Kamstra <address@hidden> writes:
> It seems that that I was badly educated by code I read: I've quite
> often seen the use of constructs like the one above.
There is, or at least used to be, a fair amount of bad old code that
does stuff like that. One of the worst offenders was (not sure if it's
been fixed) w3.
I remember lots of bug reports where the problem was eventually revealed
to be some package getting confused by w3's mucking around with the
namespace.
-Miles
--
Yo mama's so fat when she gets on an elevator it HAS to go down.
- Re: run-hooks vs. run-mode-hooks., (continued)
- Re: run-hooks vs. run-mode-hooks., Richard Stallman, 2005/05/26
- Re: run-hooks vs. run-mode-hooks., Katsumi Yamaoka, 2005/05/26
- Re: run-hooks vs. run-mode-hooks., Lute Kamstra, 2005/05/26
- Re: run-hooks vs. run-mode-hooks., Katsumi Yamaoka, 2005/05/26
- Re: run-hooks vs. run-mode-hooks., Juanma Barranquero, 2005/05/27
- Re: run-hooks vs. run-mode-hooks., Stefan Monnier, 2005/05/27
- RE: run-hooks vs. run-mode-hooks., Drew Adams, 2005/05/27
- Re: run-hooks vs. run-mode-hooks., Juanma Barranquero, 2005/05/27
- Re: run-hooks vs. run-mode-hooks., Richard Stallman, 2005/05/27
- Re: run-hooks vs. run-mode-hooks., Lute Kamstra, 2005/05/27
- Re: run-hooks vs. run-mode-hooks.,
Miles Bader <=
- Re: run-hooks vs. run-mode-hooks., Katsumi Yamaoka, 2005/05/27
- Re: run-hooks vs. run-mode-hooks., Katsumi Yamaoka, 2005/05/30
- Re: run-hooks vs. run-mode-hooks., Richard Stallman, 2005/05/31
- Re: run-hooks vs. run-mode-hooks., Richard Stallman, 2005/05/28