Re: next-error refactoring

[Ted Zlatanov]

On Thu, 03 Jun 2004, address@hidden wrote:

    > I'm trying to make next-error a universal "next DWIM" interface,
> 
> I think it is better if we don't do that now; I am not sure it is
> a good idea.
> 
> However, if you make a proposal and argue for it, I will think about
> it.

I've made the case several times on this mailing list.  There are two
reasons:

1) There are many modes that can benefit from a next-error (or
   whatever it's called by then) approach.  In code, for instance,
   next-error could move between functions.  In dired, it could move
   to the next file.  In W3 it could go back/forward in the history
   or between links.

2) Approaching next-error as we do now, in a haphazard fashion,
   implemented specifically in every mode that needs to use it, is
   painful for the developer.  It's much easier to provide hooks, a
   keymap, and all the other niceties of a standalone minor mode.
   Users will certainly appreciate that too.  Also, if and when
   next-error changes, developers won't have to change their code.

Ted