[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
bug#47150: 28.0.50; Incorrect major-mode in minibuffer
From: |
Sheng Yang |
Subject: |
bug#47150: 28.0.50; Incorrect major-mode in minibuffer |
Date: |
Mon, 15 Mar 2021 16:58:04 -0500 |
User-agent: |
Cyrus-JMAP/3.5.0-alpha0-206-g078a48fda5-fm-20210226.001-g078a48fd |
Hi Alan,
Thanks for the detailed explanation, everything makes sense now. I still would like to clarify the following
As you say, there is (minibufferp). What is wrong with that?
That does indeed suggest we really want a minibuffer-mode, rather than
just fundamental-mode. But surely, the parenthesis pairing will be
dependant on the sort of text you're typing into the minibuffer, so it
can't really be connected with, say, minibuffer-mode.
Sorry, I don't understand what you mean, here. How will the use of
(minibufferp) prevent anything else?
I am not suggesting anything wrong with (minibufferp). What I have in mind is that it would be better if there is a mode for the minibuffer, so that existing packages can still use *-modes, *-global-modes, *-inhibit-modes, etc. to decide whether to enable or disable some functionalities. I checked the several packages I mentioned, they either compare major-mode with minibuffer-inactive-mode directly, or use some *-modes variable that checks the major-mode. Their maintainers' life will be easier comparing to the case where only (minibufferp) is available and they are forced to make a corner case for the minibuffer.
I hope my description in this post is satisfactory.
Yes, crystal clear!
So, a quick summary: (i) the change in the minibuffer's major mode to
fundamental-mode was intended; (ii) there may be some problems in some
packages because of this; (iii) we aren't yet in agreement on how to
proceed with this bug report.
(i)(ii) agreed.
(iii), I am mostly in support of removing minibuffer-inactive-mode and minibuffer-inactive-mode-map, and give the minibuffer a proper mode. This way, the maintainers' life will be easier. Another option is still remove minibuffer-inactive-mode and minibuffer-inactive-mode-map, but keep minibuffer in fundamental mode. What do you think?
Sheng Yang(杨圣), PhD
Computer Science Department
University of Maryland, College Park
- bug#47150: 28.0.50; Incorrect major-mode in minibuffer, styang, 2021/03/14
- bug#47150: Emacs bug#47150 28.0.50; Incorrect major-mode in minibuffer, Sheng Yang, 2021/03/14
- bug#47150: 28.0.50; Incorrect major-mode in minibuffer, Alan Mackenzie, 2021/03/15
- bug#47150: 28.0.50; Incorrect major-mode in minibuffer, Sheng Yang, 2021/03/15
- bug#47150: 28.0.50; Incorrect major-mode in minibuffer, Alan Mackenzie, 2021/03/15
- bug#47150: 28.0.50; Incorrect major-mode in minibuffer,
Sheng Yang <=
- bug#47150: 28.0.50; Incorrect major-mode in minibuffer, Alan Mackenzie, 2021/03/22
- bug#47150: [External] : bug#47150: 28.0.50; Incorrect major-mode in minibuffer, Drew Adams, 2021/03/22
- bug#47150: [External] : bug#47150: 28.0.50; Incorrect major-mode in minibuffer, Alan Mackenzie, 2021/03/22
- bug#47150: [External] : bug#47150: 28.0.50; Incorrect major-mode in minibuffer, Drew Adams, 2021/03/22
- Message not available
- bug#47150: [External] : Re: bug#47150: 28.0.50; Incorrect major-mode in minibuffer, Drew Adams, 2021/03/22
- bug#47150: [External] : bug#47150: 28.0.50; Incorrect major-mode in minibuffer, Alan Mackenzie, 2021/03/22
- bug#47150: [External] : bug#47150: 28.0.50; Incorrect major-mode in minibuffer, Drew Adams, 2021/03/22
- bug#47150: [External] : bug#47150: 28.0.50; Incorrect major-mode in minibuffer, Alan Mackenzie, 2021/03/23
- bug#47150: [External] : bug#47150: 28.0.50; Incorrect major-mode in minibuffer, Drew Adams, 2021/03/23
- bug#47150: 28.0.50; Incorrect major-mode in minibuffer, Stefan Monnier, 2021/03/22