Re: more than one prefix argument

[Andreas Röhler]

Am 26.07.2011 22:36, schrieb Drew Adams:
> > > what about allowing more than one prefix argument
> > > by making interactive codes "p" and "P" sending
> > > truly separated.
> >
> > We already have more than one kind of prefix argument: see
> > universal-coding-system-argument for an example.  You can
> > already define as many kinds of "prefix argument" as you'd
> > like: just define a global flag and a command to set that
> > flag, and have post-command-hook clear the flag unless (eq
> > this-command 'my-prefix-setting-function).
>
> I don't think that's what Andreas is asking about.  He's not asking about being
> able to define alternative "prefix arg"-like things (to be used separately).  I
> think he wants the same user input to somehow distinguish two different things
> (?).
>
> At least that's my understanding.  IMO, he is simply confused,

Hi Drew,

maybe you are right. Then we must wait. I'll try to sum up the matter 
for the moment:

current use of "p" and "P" might be enhanced. There is an intermix 
between both, doing nearly, but not precisely, the same.

"P" quite often is used for completely different things than sending a 
number.

(if (eq 4 (prefix-numeric-value))

is used as a branch command. That's the interesting about it indeed.

However, that's not clean. It's bad to read, because the fact of "4" has 
no meaning by themselves here. That's obscure programming style.

In general let me stress: I'm living very well with Emacs as it is. Just 
saying: we can live still better.

Cheers and thanks,

Andreas


 and defining
> alternative prefix-arg-like things won't help him here.
>
> Put differently, having the user use different prefix-arg-like things is similar
> to having the user use a positive vs negative prefix arg.  And that's apparently
> not what he wants.
>
> He seems to want the user to use the _same_ behavior (no key difference) to
> somehow get two different command behaviors.  Again, that's my guess about what
> he's asking.