[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: position on changing defaults?
From: |
Richard Stallman |
Subject: |
Re: position on changing defaults? |
Date: |
Fri, 14 Mar 2008 12:44:40 -0400 |
> The interactive spec is where you specify other things about how to
> call the function interactively. So it is a cleaner interface to put
> this in the same place.
What about commands which have a lisp form as interactive spec?
There can be a function they can call to do this
(Stefan proposed that).
> Using those hooks is unreliable and slow.
That's simply not true!
CUA mode uses them, and it works fast and flawlessly.
The more things use these hooks, the more danger there is of bugs
due to running things in the wrong order. For things like this,
something fixed, at the right place in the command loop, is better.
- Re: position on changing defaults?, (continued)
- Re: position on changing defaults?, David Kastrup, 2008/03/14
- Re: position on changing defaults?, David Kastrup, 2008/03/13
- Re: position on changing defaults?, Kim F. Storm, 2008/03/13
- Re: position on changing defaults?, David Kastrup, 2008/03/13
- Re: position on changing defaults?, Stephen J. Turnbull, 2008/03/13
- Re: position on changing defaults?, David Kastrup, 2008/03/13
- Re: position on changing defaults?, Stephen J. Turnbull, 2008/03/13
- Re: position on changing defaults?, Richard Stallman, 2008/03/13
- Re: position on changing defaults?, Kim F. Storm, 2008/03/13
- Re: position on changing defaults?, David Kastrup, 2008/03/13
- Re: position on changing defaults?,
Richard Stallman <=
- Re: position on changing defaults?, Lennart Borgman (gmail), 2008/03/13
- Re: position on changing defaults?, Chong Yidong, 2008/03/13