[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: IELM prompt
From: |
Luc Teirlinck |
Subject: |
Re: IELM prompt |
Date: |
Fri, 23 Apr 2004 17:59:11 -0500 (CDT) |
Juanma Barranquero wrote:
I think some people may prefer the ":run" thing because it is an
inferior process after all, but I really don't think it provides any
kind of useful information and it's just wasting "modeline real state" ;)
It is not immediately that obvious. The ":run" may not provide that
much information, but, on the other hand, it is not completely
redundant. If you do C-c C-c or otherwise accidentally interrupt the
process, it changes to ":no process".
In the following patch I implement that by installing an :eval on
mode-line-process (so it works with C-c C-b and also when doing a
set-buffer on the prompt). Of course, ielm-print-working-buffer becomes
irrelevant and I've deleted it.
The last statement is not completely obvious either. People can
customize the modeline any way they want, or even elect to have no
modeline. So even if the _default_ modeline would mention the working
buffer, this would not necessarily make ielm-print-working-buffer
irrelevant for everybody.
Sincerely,
Luc.
- IELM prompt, Luc Teirlinck, 2004/04/22
- Re: IELM prompt, Luc Teirlinck, 2004/04/22
- Re: IELM prompt, Luc Teirlinck, 2004/04/22
- Re: IELM prompt, Juanma Barranquero, 2004/04/23
- Re: IELM prompt,
Luc Teirlinck <=
- Re: IELM prompt, Juanma Barranquero, 2004/04/24
- Re: IELM prompt, Luc Teirlinck, 2004/04/24
- Re: IELM prompt, Juanma Barranquero, 2004/04/24
- Re: IELM prompt, Luc Teirlinck, 2004/04/24
- Re: IELM prompt, Juanma Barranquero, 2004/04/25
- Re: IELM prompt, Luc Teirlinck, 2004/04/25
- Re: IELM prompt, Juanma Barranquero, 2004/04/25
Re: IELM prompt, Richard Stallman, 2004/04/24