[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
bug#24706: 26.0.50; Minor mode functions should do strict argument type
From: |
Eli Zaretskii |
Subject: |
bug#24706: 26.0.50; Minor mode functions should do strict argument type checking |
Date: |
Sun, 16 Oct 2016 21:53:56 +0300 |
> From: Philipp Stephani <p.stephani2@gmail.com>
> Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2016 18:13:01 +0000
>
> Why would you change the behavior, instead of just clarifying
> the doc?
>
> I generally prefer the behavior to be as strict as possible.
Let's not consider changing long-established behavior for purely
theoretical or philosophical reasons.
> Consider
> (foo-mode 'disable)
> If you read such code, do you assume that this enables foo-mode?
It would be a silly thing to do, so it would be worth a bug report.
However, I don't really believe someone in their right minds would do
something like that.
> However, in this case I guess it's too late, and fixing the documentation is
> indeed more appropriate.
Exactly.
> Probably this should be reworded so that the Lisp case doesn't refer to the
> interactive case at all. Making the
> documentation obvious is more important than avoiding repetition.
Sorry, I disagree. with the last sentence. Repetition is a source for
confusion.