[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: need obsolete arg in (read-from-minibuffer ...)
From: |
ken |
Subject: |
Re: need obsolete arg in (read-from-minibuffer ...) |
Date: |
Fri, 18 Mar 2011 22:22:04 -0400 |
User-agent: |
Thunderbird 2.0.0.24 (X11/20101213) |
On 03/18/2011 07:03 PM Drew Adams wrote:
>>> What do you mean by "work"? And what do you mean "without"
>>> the obsolete arg?
>> If I change the 2nd arg from "def-val" to "nil", then def-val
>> isn't displayed in the minibuffer for editing by the user.
>> However, the docs say that this arg is obsolete.
>> I take this to mean that it should be left as "nil".
>
> Correct. By "obsolete" the docs mean that that the Emacs developers think you
> should leave it as nil (i.e., not use the INITIAL-CONTENTS argument), and use
> only the DEFAULT-VALUE argument.
>
> They think that the only useful use cases make no use of INITIAL-CONTENTS.
> But
> see the doc string wrt the HIST arg, where they allow for an exception.
>
> However, if you understand the difference between DEFAULT-VALUE and
> INITIAL-CONTENTS, and _you prefer_ the behavior of INITIAL-CONTENTS for some
> reason in some particular context, then use it. Personally, I do not consider
> INITIAL-CONTENTS obsolete, FWIW.
>
> Remember that you can pull the DEFAULT-VALUE into the minibuffer using `M-n'.
> So the difference typically comes down to which you find more convenient:
> having
> a value in the minibuffer initially (and having to get rid of it if you really
> want something else instead) or pulling a value into the minibuffer when you
> need it, using `M-n'.
>
> If the default/initial value is used most of the time, then you might find it
> more convenient to have the minibuffer prefilled with it. If it is not used
> most of the time then you might find it more convenient not to have to clear
> it
> out of the minibuffer and type another value. And this relative convenience
> might change, depending on the command and the context.
>
> ....
Really? This is why that 2nd arg was declared obsolete!? That's rather
goofy. I thought there was some technical reason for it-- something to
do with code. Oh well.... Thanks for the answer.
Message not available