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

[Lars Ingebrigtsen]

Dmitry Gutov <dgutov@yandex.ru> writes:

> 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, again, what makes `interactive' special here?  Any time we
introduce something new on the language level, of course you can't use
that in older Emacs versions.

(Stefan K's macro makes it trivial to use in out-of-tree packages,
though.)

> 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.

No, you can add any predicates you want.  But not via `interactive'.

> 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).

And I responded to all of those and said why I thought those were bad
ideas.

> 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.

Better names are welcome.

-- 
(domestic pets only, the antidote for overdose, milk.)
   bloggy blog: http://lars.ingebrigtsen.no