[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: hooks, again
From: |
Stefan Monnier |
Subject: |
Re: hooks, again |
Date: |
Tue, 05 May 2015 22:55:35 -0400 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/25.0.50 (gnu/linux) |
> Nothing says just because you set the hook that way
> you cannot before you do that examine what is in the
> hook and function by function find out what they are
> and if you like them to be there.
> Usually there isn't much so it isn't a lot work
> either, and besides it is a limited but nonetheless
> good way to examine the system.
And what is it again that you gained from using (setq foo '(bla))
over (add-hook 'foo 'bla)?
> Again, what's stopping me adding those functions as
> well (with setq), if I like them?
You can reinvent add-hook, if you want, yes.
More power to you,
Stefan
- --batch on many files without reloading config (was: Re: hook syntax), Emanuel Berg, 2015/05/04
- Re: --batch on many files without reloading config, Stefan Monnier, 2015/05/05
- hooks, again (was: Re: --batch on many files without reloading config), Emanuel Berg, 2015/05/05
- Re: hooks, again, Stefan Monnier, 2015/05/05
- Message not available
- Re: hooks, again, Emanuel Berg, 2015/05/05
- Re: hooks, again,
Stefan Monnier <=
- Message not available
- Re: hooks, again, Emanuel Berg, 2015/05/05
- Re: hooks, again, Stefan Monnier, 2015/05/06
- Re: hooks, again, Emanuel Berg, 2015/05/06
- Re: hooks, again, Stefan Monnier, 2015/05/06
- Message not available
- Re: hooks, again, Emanuel Berg, 2015/05/06
- Re: hooks, again, Stefan Monnier, 2015/05/06
- Message not available
- Re: hooks, again, Emanuel Berg, 2015/05/10