[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
bug#59937: 28.2; Bad defcustom behavior
From: |
Drew Adams |
Subject: |
bug#59937: 28.2; Bad defcustom behavior |
Date: |
Wed, 14 Dec 2022 22:42:10 +0000 |
> > Is there a _logical_ requirement that there be a
> > value, in order to create the editable field for
> > the `restricted-sexp'? I don't think there should be.
> >
> > That's different from the need for a value because
> > the current code works that way.
> >
> > But I really don't see why a value is needed. All
> > the code needs to do is create an editable field
> > that expects text that satisfies the predicates,
> > no? Of what (logical) use is the ("default") value?
>
> I think you're right on point. It's just that the code works that way,
> and makes assumptions that there is always going to be a value (default
> or edited).
Thanks for confirming that you think that's the
case. If using "" works then that will be good.
- bug#59937: 28.2; Bad defcustom behavior, Drew Adams, 2022/12/10
- bug#59937: 28.2; Bad defcustom behavior, Mauro Aranda, 2022/12/10
- bug#59937: 28.2; Bad defcustom behavior, Drew Adams, 2022/12/10
- bug#59937: 28.2; Bad defcustom behavior, Mauro Aranda, 2022/12/11
- bug#59937: 28.2; Bad defcustom behavior, Drew Adams, 2022/12/13
- bug#59937: 28.2; Bad defcustom behavior, Mauro Aranda, 2022/12/13
- bug#59937: 28.2; Bad defcustom behavior, Drew Adams, 2022/12/13
- bug#59937: 28.2; Bad defcustom behavior, Mauro Aranda, 2022/12/14
- bug#59937: 28.2; Bad defcustom behavior, Drew Adams, 2022/12/14
- bug#59937: 28.2; Bad defcustom behavior, Mauro Aranda, 2022/12/14
- bug#59937: 28.2; Bad defcustom behavior,
Drew Adams <=