On Sat, Jul 8, 2023, 14:04 Eli Zaretskii <
eliz@gnu.org> wrote:
> From: Spencer Baugh <sbaugh@janestreet.com>
> Date: Sat, 08 Jul 2023 13:56:23 -0400
>
> +(defcustom which-func-use-header-line nil
> + "If non-nil, display the function name in the header line."
> + :type '(choice (const :tag "Display in header line" t)
> + (const :tag "Don't display in header line" nil)))
> +
> +(defcustom which-func-use-mode-line t
> + "If non-nil, display the function name in the mode line."
> + :type '(choice (const :tag "Display in mode line" t)
> + (const :tag "Don't display in mode line" nil)))
Defcustom's should have a :version tag.
Will do.
And why 2 separate defcustom's instead of just one? It looks
un-economical, and also allows for situations in which the behavior is
unclear without examining the code.
If I had, say, a single defcustom with possible values 'header 'mode and 'both, I would need to add an :eval to mode-line-format to decide whether to include the function name. I assumed that was undesirable.
Although I could make these current defcustoms into internal variables and just set them based on a single defcustom, would that be good?
Also, I think this needs a NEWS entry, and the user manual should be
amended to account for the new optional display.
Will do.