[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [PATCH] Re: Save Options vs. default-input-method
From: |
Per Abrahamsen |
Subject: |
Re: [PATCH] Re: Save Options vs. default-input-method |
Date: |
Thu, 14 Feb 2002 10:34:41 +0100 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.090006 (Oort Gnus v0.06) Emacs/21.1 (i686-pc-linux-gnu) |
Richard Stallman <address@hidden> writes:
> > Is there some reason we want this always to be saved?
>
> In general: If the standard value changes a lot, we might want to save
> the option even if identical to the current standard value, as it
> might not be identical to future standard values.
>
> Does that apply here? Do these standard values change a lot? I don't
> see that they do. As far as I know, these defaults have never changed
> since these features were first implemented.
True for menu-bar-mode, but tool-bar-mode is nil if you start with "-nw".
> > What precisely would go wrong if you make t the standard value?
>
> Even when there isn't any tool bar? That might work, a user might
> want to tell Emacs never to turn on the tool bar, but is not likely to
> tell Emacs to always turn on the tool bar, even when Emacs would not
> do it by default.
>
> As far as I know, Emacs always turns on the tool bar by default.
> Or at least it tries to. On some terminals this does not succeed
> because they cannot support the feature, but Emacs always tries
> to have a tool bar.
>
> Am I mistaken?
I don't think Emacs even enter the part of the code that turn on
tool-bar-mode when you start it with -nw, but it doesn't matter. If
setting standard-value unconditionally to t give the most useful
behavior, we should do that.
Will you give me an OK to change standard-value for menu-bar-mode and
tool-bar-mode to t?
- Re: [PATCH] Re: Save Options vs. default-input-method, (continued)
- Re: [PATCH] Re: Save Options vs. default-input-method, Richard Stallman, 2002/02/07
- Re: [PATCH] Re: Save Options vs. default-input-method, Per Abrahamsen, 2002/02/07
- Message not available
- Message not available
- Message not available
- Re: [PATCH] Re: Save Options vs. default-input-method, Per Abrahamsen, 2002/02/11
- Re: [PATCH] Re: Save Options vs. default-input-method, Per Abrahamsen, 2002/02/12
- Re: [PATCH] Re: Save Options vs. default-input-method, Richard Stallman, 2002/02/13
- Re: [PATCH] Re: Save Options vs. default-input-method, Richard Stallman, 2002/02/12
- Re: [PATCH] Re: Save Options vs. default-input-method, Per Abrahamsen, 2002/02/12
- Re: [PATCH] Re: Save Options vs. default-input-method, Richard Stallman, 2002/02/12
- Re: [PATCH] Re: Save Options vs. default-input-method, Per Abrahamsen, 2002/02/12
- Re: [PATCH] Re: Save Options vs. default-input-method, Richard Stallman, 2002/02/13
- Re: [PATCH] Re: Save Options vs. default-input-method,
Per Abrahamsen <=
- Re: [PATCH] Re: Save Options vs. default-input-method, Richard Stallman, 2002/02/15
- Re: [PATCH] Re: Save Options vs. default-input-method, Per Abrahamsen, 2002/02/17
- Re: [PATCH] Re: Save Options vs. default-input-method, Richard Stallman, 2002/02/17
- Re: [PATCH] Re: Save Options vs. default-input-method, Per Abrahamsen, 2002/02/19
- Re: [PATCH] Re: Save Options vs. default-input-method, Richard Stallman, 2002/02/07
- Re: [PATCH] Re: Save Options vs. default-input-method, Per Abrahamsen, 2002/02/07
- Re: [PATCH] Re: Save Options vs. default-input-method, Pavel JanÃk, 2002/02/07
- Re: [PATCH] Re: Save Options vs. default-input-method, Per Abrahamsen, 2002/02/08
- Re: [PATCH] Re: Save Options vs. default-input-method, Richard Stallman, 2002/02/07
- Re: [PATCH] Re: Save Options vs. default-input-method, Per Abrahamsen, 2002/02/07