[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Should mode commands be idempotent?
|
From: |
Stefan Monnier |
|
Subject: |
Re: Should mode commands be idempotent? |
|
Date: |
Tue, 19 Sep 2017 23:09:17 -0400 |
|
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.0.50 (gnu/linux) |
> Actually, I'm used to turning off minor modes by just calling their mode
> function a second time...
Of course, the well known and documented toggling behavior of minor
modes is not what he was referring to.
For a minor mode he was thinking of calling it twice with a positive arg
or twice with a negative arg.
Stefan
- RE: Should mode commands be idempotent?, (continued)
- RE: Should mode commands be idempotent?, Drew Adams, 2017/09/24
- Re: Should mode commands be idempotent?, Clément Pit-Claudel, 2017/09/25
- RE: Should mode commands be idempotent?, Drew Adams, 2017/09/25
- Re: Should mode commands be idempotent?, Stefan Monnier, 2017/09/25
- Re: Should mode commands be idempotent?, John Wiegley, 2017/09/25
- RE: Should mode commands be idempotent?, Drew Adams, 2017/09/26
- Re: Should mode commands be idempotent?, John Wiegley, 2017/09/26
- RE: Should mode commands be idempotent?, Drew Adams, 2017/09/26
- Re: Should mode commands be idempotent?, John Wiegley, 2017/09/26
Re: Should mode commands be idempotent?, John Wiegley, 2017/09/19
- Re: Should mode commands be idempotent?,
Stefan Monnier <=
Re: Should mode commands be idempotent?, Richard Stallman, 2017/09/20