[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: File modes facilities.
From: |
Drew Adams |
Subject: |
RE: File modes facilities. |
Date: |
Mon, 24 Oct 2005 10:13:07 -0700 |
> Yes, if you type the directory explicitly and absolutely (no
> `../', `./', `~/'), then `load-library' will complete in that
> directory. My point was that, without doing that, they complete
> differently - they use different paths (directories).
Yes, they do work differently. I haven't advocated to remove load-file
and/or merge it into load-library for precisely this reason.
But we could get rid of load-library if we could just add an interactive
spec to `load'.
As for getting rid of load-file, maybe you could make load-library's
completion understand a leading "./" as meaning "relative to
current dir" (similarly to what is done in most shells), or maybe
make a C-u prefix tell load-library that the initial minibuffer
content should be default-directory. Then maybe we could imagine
getting rid of load-file.
I almost wrote something similar (the "./" part) in my previous message, but
I think that 1) it would be confusing and somewhat hidden functionality, and
2) people would also miss "../", "~/" etc. - IOW, they would miss completion
from the `default-directory'.
Yes, a C-u could signal a change from the completing behavior of
`load-library' (absolute file name) to that of `load-file' (relative file
name, default-directory). But why do that? What is the advantage of getting
rid of `load-file', with its handy UI for file-name completion?
- Re: File modes facilities., (continued)
- Re: File modes facilities., Stefan Monnier, 2005/10/23
- RE: File modes facilities., Drew Adams, 2005/10/23
- Re: File modes facilities., Richard M. Stallman, 2005/10/24
- Re: File modes facilities., Stefan Monnier, 2005/10/24
- RE: File modes facilities., Drew Adams, 2005/10/24
- Re: File modes facilities., Stefan Monnier, 2005/10/24
- RE: File modes facilities.,
Drew Adams <=
- Re: File modes facilities., Richard M. Stallman, 2005/10/20
- Re: File modes facilities., Michael Cadilhac, 2005/10/20
- Re: File modes facilities., Miles Bader, 2005/10/20
- Re: File modes facilities., Michael Cadilhac, 2005/10/20
- Re: File modes facilities., Richard M. Stallman, 2005/10/21
- Re: File modes facilities., Michael Cadilhac, 2005/10/23
- Re: File modes facilities., Kim F. Storm, 2005/10/24
- Re: File modes facilities., Richard M. Stallman, 2005/10/25
Re: File modes facilities., Kevin Ryde, 2005/10/19