Re: position on changing defaults?

[Lennart Borgman (gmail)]

Richard Stallman wrote:
>     I can not see what the advantage with an interactive spec over a 
>     property on the function name is. Could you please tell?
> The interactive spec is where you specify other things about how to
> call the function interactively.  So it is a cleaner interface to put
> this in the same place.
Thanks. Then I think using a interactive spec has to be compared with 
the greater flexibility with using a property on the function.
>     And for the actual implementation of activating/deactivating the mark I 
>     can not see the advantage of doing it directly in the command loop 
>     instead of in special hooks before and after pre/post-command-hook. 
>
> Using those hooks is unreliable and slow.
Using a hook can't be too slow here since this is just one hook at the 
top level of the command loop, or? (I think this is Stefan's position.)
If shift things are added to pre-command hook then there can be some 
trouble because other functions might to things before those we want to 
do. However if a new hook is introduced that runs before pre-command 
hook then it should be reliable. (If this hook is not used for things 
that can break the shift things.)
The advantage of such a hook is that it can be used for other similar 
things and that the "shift things" can be written in elisp.