|
From: | Miles Bader |
Subject: | Re: bind faces? |
Date: | Sun, 14 May 2006 11:16:59 +0900 |
On 5/14/06, Drew Adams <address@hidden> wrote:
Why exactly do you want to do this? I thought I explained that. As an analogy to binding variables with `let' and functions with `flet', we would bind faces. Why does anyone want to bind variables and functions, as opposed to using `unwind-protect', assigning new definitions, and restoring afterward?
"By analogy with" isn't a very compelling reason for a feature. What I'm asking is: "What is a real-world problem where you would need such a thing?" My impression is that faces in general reflect a more permanent sort of state, and that the idea of "binding" face definitions is a bit alien to the way they are used. -Miles -- Do not taunt Happy Fun Ball.
[Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread] |