Re: interactive-p and called-interactively-p

[Stefan Monnier]

>     The best way to make such a distinction clearly visible is by
>     providing an argument.  Even better would be to make the
>     argument mandatory.

> A mandatory argument would make people think, each time, about which
> question they want to ask.  That would be good.  But it would require
> changing every existing call to either of these functions.  That's
> a rather high price.

Since I don't like the status quo and want to replace those two
functions with a single one, there's going to be a price in terms of
changes.  The lower price is to obsolete called-interactively-p and add
an optional arg to interactive-p instead.  You don't seem to like this
option.  The next lower price is to obsolete interactive-p, which will
require pretty much the same number of changes as if we introduced a new
function (since 97% of the code uses interactive-p rather than
called-interactively-p).  So if we obsolete interactive-p we may as well
introduce a brand new function with a mandatory argument.  The only
problem with it would be to find a good name for it, since
called-interactively-p is already taken.


        Stefan