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

[Stefan Monnier]

>>>> Tho things can get murky: e.g. when dealing with multi-language buffers,
>>>> or with commands like `diff-refine-hunk` (which I often use in Gnus's
>>>> article buffers).
>>> That's not a mode-specific command, so tagging it as such would be an
>>> error...
>> The point was that it's not necessarily obvious that it's not mode-specific.
> Indeed -- tagging commands as mode-specific is not a mechanical task (or
> something that can be inferred heuristically), but requires actually
> giving each command some consideration.

I think it would be good to try and clarify what should be the
criterion, and not in terms of "should be listed in M-x" since that
inherently depends on opinions, but rather in more technical terms that
depend on what the command does.
[ A bit like with docstrings: we like docstrings that say what the
  function does rather than when/where it's meant to be used.  ]

Maybe something like "would inevitably signal an error"?


        Stefan