Re: yes-or-no-p prompt conditionally broken in master?

[Eli Zaretskii]

> From: Andreas Schwab <address@hidden>
> Cc: address@hidden,  address@hidden,  address@hidden,  address@hidden,  
> address@hidden,  address@hidden
> Date: Fri, 04 Sep 2015 14:40:00 +0200
> 
> Eli Zaretskii <address@hidden> writes:
> 
> >> From: Andreas Schwab <address@hidden>
> >> Cc: address@hidden,  address@hidden,  address@hidden,  address@hidden,  
> >> address@hidden,  address@hidden
> >> Date: Fri, 04 Sep 2015 11:26:46 +0200
> >> 
> >> Eli Zaretskii <address@hidden> writes:
> >> 
> >> > Any objections to removing yes-or-no-p (with a defalias for backward
> >> > compatibility, of course) and making y-or-n-p serve both duties,
> >> > controlled by some defcustom?
> >> 
> >> That doesn't make sense.  They implement different intented meaning.
> >
> > Sorry, I lost you: what different meaning is that?
> 
> (elisp) Yes-or-No Queries

Still no clue, sorry.

Just to be sure we are talking about the same thing: the signature of
both functions and the return value are the same.  What I propose is
to change the body so that it could act like one or the other,
depending on the value of some defcustom.

If you still think this is wrong, please elaborate.