Pierre Rouleau comments

Results 68 comments of


                                            Pierre Rouleau

trafficstars

Minor doc, how-to-use updates

I second what was said about this pull-request. Seems like nothing has changed on this repo since April 2016. I have forked the repo and have integrated the changes requested...

I don't understand what "global" means

@Trevoke Here's my understanding: There are 2 commands: - ``(command-log-mode &optional ARG)`` toggles the command logging for the *current* buffer. Nothing else. - ``(global-command-log-mode &optional ARG)`` toggles the command logging...

Doesn't follow package etiquette (esp. keys bindings)

Hi @stardiviner, I have forked this project and integrated your suggestion in the PR in [my fork of the project](https://github.com/pierre-rouleau/command-log-mode). I'd like to see the changes integrated here but there...

Coding issue: code transformation commands should use the '*' in the interactive spec stating they do not modify read-only buffers.

I was just reading the code. I tried setting a buffer with `read-only-mode` and applied `sp-add-to-previous-sexp` and it did refuse to execute with the error stating the buffer was read-only...

Coding issue: code transformation commands should use the '*' in the interactive spec stating they do not modify read-only buffers.

The code in emacs/src/callint.c that defines the behaviour checks buffer state when '*' is specified and returns an error if the buffer is read-only. IMO using the '\*' explicitly is...

Coding issue: code transformation commands should use the '*' in the interactive spec stating they do not modify read-only buffers.

It's possible that the *current* code has no side effect. But a language feature like that is a kind of defensive-programming mechanism. It does not hurt not having it in...

Coding issue: code transformation commands should use the '*' in the interactive spec stating they do not modify read-only buffers.

@ThibautVerron , the reason non-interactive functions do not have checks for read-only buffers might be performance. However a large chunck of code is called via interactive functions. If all these...

Coding issue: code transformation commands should use the '*' in the interactive spec stating they do not modify read-only buffers.

@ Fuco1, I modified the ticket title to properly describe what I reported. I am advocating using this defensive-programming utility that prevents interactive function to operate on a read-only buffer....

Coding issue: code transformation commands should use the '*' in the interactive spec stating they do not modify read-only buffers.

@ThibautVerron You are correct: an interactive spec is only checked for the function called interactively, either from the user action or from a `call-interactively` call, and not from a direct...

Question: how can a post-handler modify position of point?

Erlang has lists that have comma separators enclosed in `[ ]` pairs, with each element separated by comma. It also has a statement terminator period. The following 2 lines are...