|
From: | Mariano Montone |
Subject: | Re: [ELPA] New package: progress-bar |
Date: | Tue, 29 Oct 2024 12:48:59 -0300 |
User-agent: | Mozilla Thunderbird |
Yes.Mariano Montone <marianomontone@gmail.com> writes:El 29/10/24 a las 12:03, Philip Kaludercic escribió:My main question, which I realised too late when reading the code, is if you could rework this to integrate into existing instances of `make-progress-reporter', just replacing the UI. It seems like it would be more effective and consistent, and avoid hard dependencies of programs that want to use `dotimes-with-progress-bar' (or as I renamed it `progress-bar-dotimes' to avoid namespace clashes), when `dotimes-with-progress-reporter' already exists and is being used.Oh. Thanks for the patch! I'll look at it.Just keep in mind that it is not a patch, it is just a convenient way to suggest changes and add comments.
The integration part is in progress-bar-integrations.el. How does it looks to you?Oh, I missed that. My main issue is that this mixes both the `progress-reporter-do-update' integration with other advice on functions like `package-upgrade-all'. I think having a global minor mode would be the right approach, instead of advising on the top-level. Generally it would be neat if we could find a solution that would avoid the need for advice, but I don't see a clean way to do that right now. Would you be interested in preparing a patch for subr.el that would make progress-reporters more flexible?
Yes, but I would need more precise explanations from you on your idea of how to do it.
Mariano
[Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread] |