[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
bug#47150: [External] : bug#47150: 28.0.50; Incorrect major-mode in mini
From: |
Drew Adams |
Subject: |
bug#47150: [External] : bug#47150: 28.0.50; Incorrect major-mode in minibuffer |
Date: |
Mon, 22 Mar 2021 18:40:05 +0000 |
> I'm in favor of introducing a `minibuffer-mode`.
Why?
> Part of the question is also when and how that mode is activated (since
> activating such a mode has the effect of deleting the local variables).
> I think we should call `minibuffer-mode` every time we (re)activate
> a minibuffer.
Why?
> The way I see it, `eval-expression` would want to use a new major mode
> that derives from `minibuffer-mode`.
Why change the major mode? What's involved, besides
keymaps? Does parenthesis pairing and such require
a major-mode change?
> And more generally
> `read-from-minibuffer` should accept an argument that says which major
> mode to use (I think it'd make sense to re-use the `keymap` argument
> for that: if that argument is `functionp`, then treat it as a major
> mode, if it's `keymapp` then use it as the keymap).
Why? What's the use case for changing major modes?
> It would also provide a cleaner way to do what we currently do via the
> `minibuffer-with-setup-hook` hack.
Really? Everything that someone might do on that
hook you would have passed as a function arg? Why
would you find that cleaner?
> >> It seems to me the minibuffer is always inactive? I tried M-x,
> >> M-!, M-:, all reports minibuffer-inactive-mode in Emacs 27.1. Is this
> >> a mistake and the offending commit was trying to fix this
> >> inconsistency?
> > Very much so!
>
> BTW: thank you for that.
AFAICT, the only "offense" was committed by the
misleading mode name. I don't see why two (or
more...) major modes are needed.
> > 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;
>
> The minibuffer used to be "always" in fundamental mode in Emacs<24
> (since there was no `minibuffer-inactive-mode` back then), so I'm not
> too worried.
Right. There was nothing missing before
`minibuffer-inactive-mode' was added, except possibly
the corner case you mentioned for a standalone minibuffer
frame. (And I use such a frame, and I've never felt the
need to use it in an "inactive" active way.)
- bug#47150: [External] : bug#47150: 28.0.50; Incorrect major-mode in minibuffer, (continued)
- 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
- bug#47150: 28.0.50; Incorrect major-mode in minibuffer, Stefan Monnier, 2021/03/22
- bug#47150: [External] : bug#47150: 28.0.50; Incorrect major-mode in minibuffer,
Drew Adams <=
- bug#47150: [External] : bug#47150: 28.0.50; Incorrect major-mode in minibuffer, Stefan Monnier, 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, Stefan Monnier, 2021/03/22
- bug#47150: [External] : bug#47150: 28.0.50; Incorrect major-mode in minibuffer, Drew Adams, 2021/03/22
- bug#47150: 28.0.50; Incorrect major-mode in minibuffer, Alan Mackenzie, 2021/03/22
- bug#47150: 28.0.50; Incorrect major-mode in minibuffer, Stefan Monnier, 2021/03/22
bug#47150: [External] : bug#47150: 28.0.50; Incorrect major-mode in minibuffer, jakanakaevangeli, 2021/03/22
bug#47150: [External] : Re: bug#47150: 28.0.50; Incorrect major-mode in minibuffer, jakanakaevangeli, 2021/03/23