Re: set-background-color

[David Kastrup]

eliz@is.elta.co.il (Eli Zaretskii) writes:

> On 17 Feb 2002, David Kastrup wrote:
> 
> > > So that we won't need to cope with ``color names'' such as
> > > FooBar, nil, etc.
> > 
> > You have to "cope" with them, anyway, as you can call the same
> > function non-interactively.
> 
> The way we do that is inappropriate for interactive usage.

This is another case where the behavior to a user appears quite
unacceptable, as valid color names are rejected: it is perfectly
understandable that they are not completed, but they are not even
accepted when you press return.

That there may be technical reasons underlying the unfortunate current
behavior, may be an explanation for the current behavior, but not an
excuse.

I find it counterproductive if core developers scorn criticism
because they do not feel able or willing to cope with the raised
issues.

I find it perfectly understandable if they say current priorities do
not permit them any work on that.  But if they suggest that they
consider an obviously dissatisfactory behavior correct, they
discourage other people from trying to fix it.  Because those other
people must then assume that their fixes will never get accepted.

-- 
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum
Email: David.Kastrup@t-online.de