Re: utf-translate-cjk-mode

[Kai Großjohann]

Dave Love <address@hidden> writes:

> address@hidden (Kai Großjohann) writes:
>
>> Are you happy now, or is there anything missing?
>
> As far as I know, the new definition is OK if `define-minor-mode' now
> uses the keywords appropriately.

Good.

> I knew it didn't rather recently.

Yes, that's why I waited with the final implementation...  Sorry for
not mentioning this more explicitly.

> There isn't a NEWS entry or anything in the manual about
> `define-minor-mode' accepting keyword args.

OK.  Maybe Stefan can add that?

> I'm not happy with pejorative descriptions of Custom and
> complicating things because people wish to avoid it for some reason.

I'm not against Custom, and if any of my descriptions sounded
pejorative, I apologize.  I just like to use conditionals and comments
and ordering in my init file, that's why I decided not to use
Custom.  The "missing Custom circumvention" for utf-translate-cjk I
wanted to add for consistency.

I don't think that the define-minor-mode statement that's now in the
code is significantly more or less complicated than the defcustom
that you wrote.

So it seems the result of all this talking was mostly that
define-minor-mode was improved a bit, and I guess that's not so bad :-)
-- 
A preposition is not a good thing to end a sentence with.