Re: Deprecation of define-key?

[Philip Kaludercic]

Lars Ingebrigtsen <larsi@gnus.org> writes:

> Augusto Stoffel <arstoffel@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> Wouldn't it make sense to let keymap-set take multiple key-definition
>> pairs as arguments, like setq et al?  This would be very convenient
>> e.g. in user configuration files, where currently one often finds long
>> sequences of define-key calls.  This looks much better to me:
>>
>> (keymap-set some-map
>>   "a" 'command-a
>>   "b" 'command-b
>>   "c" 'command-c)
>
> I think that makes sense, and we'd just have to extend the definition
> from
>
> (keymap-set KEYMAP KEY DEFINITION)
>
> to
>
> (keymap-set KEYMAP KEY DEFINITION &rest PAIRS)
>
> But how should the indentation be?  It's not a definition form, so
> indenting it like the above would be unusual.

Why should this kind of indentation only be used for definition forms?
I wouldn't consider `progn', `pcase', or `cl-callf' definitions, and
they all have the `lisp-indent-function' property set.  I believe the
indentation that Augusto suggested is perfectly reasonable.