RE: [External] : Re: command mode-specificity [was: scratch/command 064f146 1/2: Change...]

[Drew Adams]

> > Of course I guessed that the "my stats dept"
> > part of Lars's post was cute, a joke.  But I
> > didn't guess that his 97% was also a joke.
> 
> Yes, it was.  But now I've done some mark-ups, so I can actually have
> my stats dept. do some stats...
> 
> In gnus/*.el, there's 1018 interactive commands.  Of those,
> I've tagged 660 interactive commands as being mode-specific.
> 
> In eww, there 44 interactive commands, 34 are marked as being
> mode-specific.  So it's about 50-75%.

Only for two libraries (gnus and eww).  That
doesn't tell us much - a sample of 2.

I still have my hunch - but will gladly be proven
wrong.

I'll gladly be proven wrong, and so know the truth.
But I won't be glad to _be_ wrong about this.  It
doesn't seem right that most commands would - or
should - be mode-specific.

I'd also be interested in knowing what differences
there are, if any, between major and minor modes,
in this regard.
___

FWIW:

I just counted, for Bookmark+ commands: 24.6% of the
total are specific to the bookmark-list buffer, and
so to its mode.  An additional 2 bookmark commands
(out of the 665 total) are also mode-specific, for
Info mode and grep mode, respectively.  All the rest
(>75%) are not specific to any mode - you can use
them in any mode, anywhere.

I won't bother to try counting my other libraries.
My code might not be typical, of course.  But I
still am curious about the general case.  Can you
provide more than a sample of just 2 libraries?

And if you can, do you think that 3rd-party code is
likely, or unlikely, to follow the same pattern (and
why)?