Re: messages override minibuffer input

[Richard Stallman]

You have found plenty of justification for adding `optional-message'.

    > You can write Lisp code to do the same things now done at C level.  We
    > could also turn that C code into a subr, if that is useful.

    True, but how should client code request it?  I can't add an optional
    argument to `optional-message' and have it work like `message' now, of
    course.

Is it right for clients to have to request it?
I think it should be controlled by a user option, that's all.