Re: dired.el

[Luc Teirlinck]

Stefan Monnier wrote:

   let-binding inhibit-read-only would probably avoid this kind of problem and
   would also be more correct, most likely.

You mean let-binding inhibit-read-only to t around the call to message?
That would not seem to be OK, because, one never knows, the user might
have, deliberately or accidentally, made the dired buffer writable.

   Moving the `message' call outside the let scope is also a good change, in
   either case.

It would seem to solve the problem, unless some other function called
dired-undo with inhibit-read-only bound to nil, in which case that
other function would need to be fixed.  But dired-undo is not likely
to be called from other Lisp functions anyway.

Sincerely,

Luc.