[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
bug#65459: completing-read INITIAL-VALUE unaware of COLLECTION and REQUI
From: |
Stefan Kangas |
Subject: |
bug#65459: completing-read INITIAL-VALUE unaware of COLLECTION and REQUIRE-MATCH |
Date: |
Mon, 4 Sep 2023 15:16:15 -0700 |
Stefan Monnier via "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of
text editors" <bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org> writes:
>> Thanks, that clarifies that question! Perhaps a paragraph along those lines
>> could be added to "(elisp)Advising Functions"?
>
> What about the following?
I think it's a good addition.
> diff --git a/doc/lispref/functions.texi b/doc/lispref/functions.texi
> index 53525e6b386..236b823e7e6 100644
> --- a/doc/lispref/functions.texi
> +++ b/doc/lispref/functions.texi
> @@ -1994,9 +1994,16 @@ Advising Named Functions
> debugging does not notice or remember that the function has been modified
> by advice.
>
> - For these reasons, advice should be reserved for the cases where you
> -cannot modify a function's behavior in any other way. If it is
> -possible to do the same thing via a hook, that is preferable
> + Note that the problems are not due to advice per se, but to the act
> +of modifying a named function. It is even more problematic to modify
> +a named function via lower-level primitives like @code{fset},
> +@code{defalias}, or @code{cl-letf}. From that point of view, advice
> +is the better way to modify a named function because it keeps track of
> +the modifications, so they can be listed and undone.
> +
> + Modifying a named function should be reserved for
> +the cases where you cannot modify Emacs' behavior in any other way.
> +If it is possible to do the same thing via a hook, that is preferable
> (@pxref{Hooks}). If you simply want to change what a particular key
> does, it may be better to write a new command, and remap the old
> command's key bindings to the new one (@pxref{Remapping Commands}).