emacs-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Renaming non-X x_* procedures in xdisp.c (and elsewhere)


From: Eli Zaretskii
Subject: Re: Renaming non-X x_* procedures in xdisp.c (and elsewhere)
Date: Sat, 23 Mar 2019 21:32:47 +0200

> From: Alex <address@hidden>
> Cc: address@hidden,  address@hidden
> Date: Sat, 23 Mar 2019 12:55:26 -0600
> 
> > But what you propose in the patch stops short of that goal, it just
> > renames the functions that are explicitly called from xdisp.c.  It
> > doesn't rename x_* functions in files unrelated to X.  I'm not sure
> > this partial renaming is worth the trouble.
> 
> It can be considered as just a step towards that goal.  As I mentioned, I
> don't see why all the work has to happen at the same time. IMO the RIF
> x_* and the multiply-defined x_* are separate, even if related, issues;
> the RIF x_* being much easier to solve (as demonstrated).

I tend to prefer to do it in one go.  The reason is that in the past
we've seen once or twice someone who made such initial steps towards a
goal that we considered important, but then didn't follow up with the
rest, and we were left with a slightly less readable and/or slightly
less familiar code, and no real gains.  So now I'm less inclined to
support such partial steps which in themselves have little gains to
offer.

Of course, it's possible to accumulate the changes piecemeal on a
separate branch, if you want to work on this in several increments,
I'm only talking about landing them on master.

> If you're referring to another class of x_* procedures to be renamed,
> then those can be done in a later commit.

I think I see them all as a single class.  That some of them are used
through redisplay_interface is not an important distinction, IMO.

> >> P.S. Should x_clear_window_mouse_face instead be renamed to
> >> clear_window_mouse_face since it doesn't depend on HAVE_WINDOW_SYSTEM
> >> like the others do?
> >
> > It does depend on the window-system, albeit somewhat subtly: it is
> > only invoked for some terminal types.
> 
> If it's not invoked for non-GUI Emacs, then the gui_* prefix would
> indeed be appropriate.

When the mouse is involved, the separation between GUI and non-GUI
tends to be blurry.



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]