Re: scratch/command 064f146 1/2: Change command to interactive ... modes

[Dmitry Gutov]

On 17.02.2021 00:00, Lars Ingebrigtsen wrote:
> And again, I don't see what makes extending `interactive' so special
> here.  We introduce new things in Emacs Lisp all the time when we think
> that that improves the language.

You're extending it in an incompatible way, one that most third-party 
code won't be able to make use of for years to come. And this extension 
basically sets in stone the kinds of "tags" 
read-extended-command-predicate can meaningfully use. The new feature 
being added to 'interactive' is non-extensible.

And yet, we have an alternative approach which is both more flexible and 
available for people to use now. I don't see why we would want to spend 
effort on maintaining support for both, honestly.

As for verbosity, it's not like there weren't any suggestions to reduce 
the number of annotations either (like tying command definitions to 
packages, or custom groups, etc).

Also, why all the new functions in simple.el are called simply 
completion-*? They are not applicable to completion in any other 
contexts, only to command completion in M-x.