[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Why is `C-M-x' only for top-level defuns?
From: |
Drew Adams |
Subject: |
Why is `C-M-x' only for top-level defuns? |
Date: |
Wed, 11 Jan 2012 09:06:24 -0800 |
There is likely a good reason for this, but I'll still pose the question, to
learn.
Why not let `C-M-x' re-evaluate a "defun" (defcustom, defface, etc.) that is not
necessarily at top level? E.g., with point on, say, `defface' in this sexp, why
shouldn't `C-M-x' redefine the face?
(when twillig-&-the-tithy-toves-do-tyre-&-timble-in-the-twabe
(defface ...))
Currently, in order to make `C-M-x' work for such a "defun" I temporarily move
its first line to column 1 and then hit `C-M-x'. Seems like a silly workaround,
but I don't know of a better one. Am I missing something?
- Why is `C-M-x' only for top-level defuns?,
Drew Adams <=
- Re: Why is `C-M-x' only for top-level defuns?, Thien-Thi Nguyen, 2012/01/11
- Re: Why is `C-M-x' only for top-level defuns?, Juri Linkov, 2012/01/11
- RE: Why is `C-M-x' only for top-level defuns?, Drew Adams, 2012/01/11
- Re: Why is `C-M-x' only for top-level defuns?, Stefan Monnier, 2012/01/11
- Re: Why is `C-M-x' only for top-level defuns?, Daniel Colascione, 2012/01/11
- RE: Why is `C-M-x' only for top-level defuns?, Drew Adams, 2012/01/11
- Re: Why is `C-M-x' only for top-level defuns?, Stefan Monnier, 2012/01/11
- Re: Why is `C-M-x' only for top-level defuns?, Daniel Colascione, 2012/01/11
- Re: Why is `C-M-x' only for top-level defuns?, Thierry Volpiatto, 2012/01/12