[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: define-derived-mode again (was: Emacs design question)
From: |
Miles Bader |
Subject: |
Re: define-derived-mode again (was: Emacs design question) |
Date: |
23 Jul 2003 16:36:04 +0900 |
Richard Stallman <address@hidden> writes:
> (defalias 'define-major-mode 'define-derived-mode)
>
> The two macros should not have the same calling convention.
> define-major-mode should not have a parent argument.
Why? It's certainly the case that some major-modes have `parent' modes,
and some don't; really, the fact that they're major modes seems far more
significant than that particular detail, so I'd think it would be _good_
that they use the same macro, as long as:
(1) Its name is equally applicable in either case, and emphasizes
what's important (that they're major modes); `define-derived-mode'
falls down here because it emphasizes something that's (IMHO) a
minor detail in the derived case, and arguably _false_ in the
non-derived case. `define-major-mode' has neither of these problems.
(2) Using the same macro for both is not inconvenient for either case;
personally I think an extra `nil' is not much of an inconvenience...
-Miles
--
"Whatever you do will be insignificant, but it is very important that
you do it." Mahatma Ghandi
- Re: run-mode-hooks, Richard Stallman, 2003/07/16
- Emacs design question (was: run-mode-hooks), Kai Großjohann, 2003/07/16
- Re: Emacs design question (was: run-mode-hooks), Richard Stallman, 2003/07/20
- define-derived-mode again (was: Emacs design question), Stefan Monnier, 2003/07/21
- Re: define-derived-mode again (was: Emacs design question), Miles Bader, 2003/07/22
- Re: define-derived-mode again (was: Emacs design question), Richard Stallman, 2003/07/23
- Re: define-derived-mode again (was: Emacs design question),
Miles Bader <=
- Re: define-derived-mode again (was: Emacs design question), Stefan Monnier, 2003/07/23
- Re: define-derived-mode again (was: Emacs design question), Miles Bader, 2003/07/23
- Re: define-derived-mode again (was: Emacs design question), Richard Stallman, 2003/07/25
- Re: define-derived-mode again (was: Emacs design question), Richard Stallman, 2003/07/24
- Re: define-derived-mode again (was: Emacs design question), Richard Stallman, 2003/07/24
- Re: define-derived-mode again (was: Emacs design question), Richard Stallman, 2003/07/22