[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Defadvice use

From: Matthias
Subject: Re: Defadvice use
Date: 18 Apr 2005 23:07:33 +0200
User-agent: Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.3

Stefan Monnier <address@hidden> wrote:

Thanks for your indication.

> (...) In general, I don't think there's a better way. I would argue
> that if you need to use such an ugly hack, you should only be
> morally allowed to do that after sending a patch that will make it
> unnecessary in the future.

You're true.

I am working on `dired-do-shell-command' and alike
commands (defined in Dired and Dired-X): I'd like them to be
completion compliant via the useful library Shell Command from
Masatoshi Tsuchiya.

The doc spec of `dired-read-shell-command' says `This is an extra
function so that you can redefine it, e.g., to use gmhist.' Dired-X do
this: it redefines the command using `defun'. I feel like it's very
ugly... But my knowledge in elisp is somewhat limited: I am not an

So, I question now: Do you recommend that my patch change this (one
could use a variable containing the name of a function...)?

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]