[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
bug#66554: [PATCH] Add the public API of Compat to the core
From: |
Eli Zaretskii |
Subject: |
bug#66554: [PATCH] Add the public API of Compat to the core |
Date: |
Tue, 06 Feb 2024 21:37:01 +0200 |
> From: Philip Kaludercic <philipk@posteo.net>
> Cc: mail@daniel-mendler.de, 66554@debbugs.gnu.org, stefankangas@gmail.com,
> monnier@iro.umontreal.ca
> Date: Tue, 06 Feb 2024 19:10:32 +0000
>
> >> +@defmac compat-call fun &rest args
> >> +This macro calls the compatibility function @var{fun} with @var{args}.
> >> +Many functions provided by Compat can be called directly without this
> >> +macro. However in the case where Compat provides an alternative
> >> +version of an existing function, the function call has to go through
> >> +@code{compat-call}.
> >> +@end defmac
> >
> > This description left me without understanding when I need to use
> > compat-call and when I can just call FUN. Can you explain more?
>
> The intention was for this paragraph to catch that case,
>
> However in the case where Compat provides an alternative version of an
> existing function, the function call has to go through
> @code{compat-call}.
>
> though the real information is to be found in the Compat manual, where
> the functions that have to be called via compat-call are documented.
>
> Should the above sentence be rephrased to give a general feeling for
> when this is the case
>
> However in the case where Compat provides an alternative version of an
> existing function, the function call has to go through
> @code{compat-call}. This is the case when, for example the signature
> changes between versions, preventing older versions of Emacs from
> using optional arguments introduced in newer releases.
>
> or should we just refer to the external manual?
Let me try to make my point more clear: I'd prefer that the reader
emerges from reading this description with a practical way of knowing
when to call the function directly and when to call it via
'compat-call'. If that's not easy to understand, perhaps we should
tell that 'compat-call' should always be used, to avoid some rare
corner cases where a direct call will not do, and be done?
- bug#66554: [PATCH] Add the public API of Compat to the core, Daniel Mendler, 2024/02/01
- bug#66554: [PATCH] Add the public API of Compat to the core, Philip Kaludercic, 2024/02/02
- bug#66554: [PATCH] Add the public API of Compat to the core, Eli Zaretskii, 2024/02/02
- bug#66554: [PATCH] Add the public API of Compat to the core, Philip Kaludercic, 2024/02/06
- bug#66554: [PATCH] Add the public API of Compat to the core,
Eli Zaretskii <=
- bug#66554: [PATCH] Add the public API of Compat to the core, Philip Kaludercic, 2024/02/06
- bug#66554: [PATCH] Add the public API of Compat to the core, Philip Kaludercic, 2024/02/07
- bug#66554: [PATCH] Add the public API of Compat to the core, Daniel Mendler, 2024/02/07
- bug#66554: [PATCH] Add the public API of Compat to the core, Eli Zaretskii, 2024/02/07
- bug#66554: [PATCH] Add the public API of Compat to the core, Philip Kaludercic, 2024/02/08
- bug#66554: [PATCH] Add the public API of Compat to the core, Eli Zaretskii, 2024/02/08
- bug#66554: [PATCH] Add the public API of Compat to the core, Daniel Mendler, 2024/02/08
- bug#66554: [PATCH] Add the public API of Compat to the core, Philip Kaludercic, 2024/02/10
- bug#66554: [PATCH] Add the public API of Compat to the core, Eli Zaretskii, 2024/02/10
- bug#66554: [PATCH] Add the public API of Compat to the core, Philip Kaludercic, 2024/02/10