Re: abbrev-mode - toggle-abbrev-mode

[Stephen J. Turnbull]

Adding emacs-devel because I think this is a more general policy question.

In general some-mode and toggle-some-mode are different.  (some-mode nil)
is equivalent to (toggle-some-mode), while (some-mode 1) and (some-mode -1)
unconditionally turn it on and off respectively.  As far as I know, XEmacs tries
to avoid the toggle-, turn-on-, turn-off-some-mode style.  I would
prefer to avoid
introducing it if Emacs is not actively promoting that style (in fact,
I'd prefer to
ask Emacs to do things our way, on principle, not out of laziness ;-).

I'm certainly in favor of maintaining common interfaces for common
functionality,
but first we should think about whether there are reasons for doing it
one way or
the other.

On 10/15/07, Andreas Röhler <address@hidden> wrote:
>
> It seems as `toggle-abbrev-mode' in GNU Emacs and
> `abbrev-mode' in XEmacs are reciprocal.
>
> As I'm going to adapt my GNU Emacs Lisp stuff to run at
> XEmacs too, I would like to keep the diffs as small as
> possible.
>
> I'm not going to say, abbrev-mode in XEmacs isn't as
> good as in GNU, rather I'm campaigning to take the
> X-way there.
>
> However, in cases were commands only differ by name,
> what about to give RMS the honour and simply follow GNU
> convention?
>
> Thanks all
>
> Andreas Röhler
>
> _______________________________________________
> XEmacs-Beta mailing list
> address@hidden
> http://calypso.tux.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xemacs-beta
>