[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
bug#17560: 24.4.50; wrong type argument if rmail-delete-after-output set
From: |
Ken Olum |
Subject: |
bug#17560: 24.4.50; wrong type argument if rmail-delete-after-output set |
Date: |
Fri, 23 May 2014 11:50:59 -0400 |
I'd put
(if (not count) (setq count 1))
in rmail-delete-forward and for consistency make the argument of
rmail-delete-backward optional and add the same code there.
Unfortunately, that is not consistent with rmail-next-message, for
example. The alternative would be to make the argument not optional and
change all callers to say (rmail-delete-forward 1). Unfortunately, in
previous versions of emacs this would mean to move backward, so new
calls would be incompatible with the old definition, which I think
argues against this plan.
Ken
- bug#17560: 24.4.50; wrong type argument if rmail-delete-after-output set, Ken Olum, 2014/05/23
- bug#17560: 24.4.50; wrong type argument if rmail-delete-after-output set, Eli Zaretskii, 2014/05/23
- bug#17560: 24.4.50; wrong type argument if rmail-delete-after-output set,
Ken Olum <=
- bug#17560: 24.4.50; wrong type argument if rmail-delete-after-output set, Eli Zaretskii, 2014/05/23
- bug#17560: 24.4.50; wrong type argument if rmail-delete-after-output set, Ken Olum, 2014/05/23
- bug#17560: 24.4.50; wrong type argument if rmail-delete-after-output set, Eli Zaretskii, 2014/05/23
- bug#17560: 24.4.50; wrong type argument if rmail-delete-after-output set, Ken Olum, 2014/05/23
- bug#17560: 24.4.50; wrong type argument if rmail-delete-after-output set, Eli Zaretskii, 2014/05/24
- bug#17560: 24.4.50; wrong type argument if rmail-delete-after-output set, Ken Olum, 2014/05/27
- bug#17560: 24.4.50; wrong type argument if rmail-delete-after-output set, Eli Zaretskii, 2014/05/30