[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Specifiers
From: |
Stefan Monnier |
Subject: |
Re: Specifiers |
Date: |
Fri, 30 May 2008 11:11:32 -0400 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.0.60 (gnu/linux) |
>>>> Yes, pretty much, except we don't have to worry about combinations of
>>>> buffer-local with other forms of foo-local at the same time (well,
>>>> supposedly we have to worry about it for buffer-local + frame-local,
>>>> but we already know we don't handle that correctly).
>>> That's supposed to be an advantage?
>>
>> What does "That" refer to?
>> Not having to worry about combinations is an advantage, yes.
> Knowing that we don't handle something correctly already is an advantage
> over a scheme that has a chance of offering well-defined behavior?
I think you misunderstood. What is happening is that you're suggesting
to make such combinations even more complex and common, while we already
aren't even able to handle them right in the limited cases that
can currently arise.
Stefan
- Re: face-remapping patch, (continued)
- Re: face-remapping patch, David Kastrup, 2008/05/29
- Specifiers (was: face-remapping patch), Stefan Monnier, 2008/05/29
- Re: Specifiers, David Kastrup, 2008/05/29
- Re: Specifiers, Stefan Monnier, 2008/05/29
- Re: Specifiers, Stephen J. Turnbull, 2008/05/29
- Re: Specifiers (was: face-remapping patch), Richard M Stallman, 2008/05/29
- Re: Specifiers, Stefan Monnier, 2008/05/29
- Re: Specifiers, David Kastrup, 2008/05/30
- Re: Specifiers, Stefan Monnier, 2008/05/30
- Re: Specifiers, David Kastrup, 2008/05/30
- Re: Specifiers,
Stefan Monnier <=
- Re: Specifiers, Richard M Stallman, 2008/05/31
- Re: face-remapping patch, Stefan Monnier, 2008/05/29
- Re: face-remapping patch, David Kastrup, 2008/05/29
- Re: face-remapping patch, Miles Bader, 2008/05/29
- Re: face-remapping patch, Chong Yidong, 2008/05/28