Re: position on changing defaults?

[David Kastrup]

Stefan Monnier <address@hidden> writes:

>>> AFAICT, the approach I proposed where most/all the movement commands get
>>> changed to call a special function in the interactive spec wouldn't
>>> suffer from any such problems.  I think it's the best approach so far.
>
>> I can not see what the advantage with an interactive spec over a property on
>> the function name is. Could you please tell?
>
> Very simple: no magic, no pre/post-command-hook.

I think this functionality is eligible for an actual interactive spec
letter.  That makes people more comfortable with using it where
appropriate.

-- 
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum