[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: interactive-p and called-interactively-p
From: |
MON KEY |
Subject: |
Re: interactive-p and called-interactively-p |
Date: |
Thu, 3 Sep 2009 12:27:28 -0400 |
> 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.
I've been using one these in a functions' lambda list behind &optional:
interp intrp inter-p intr-p
I think these are clear, reasonably terse, and in keeping with the
suggestions of docstring for `interactive-p':
,----
| If you want to test whether your function was called with
| `call-interactively', the way to do that is by adding an extra
| optional argument, and making the `interactive' spec specify non-nil
| unconditionally for that argument. (`p' is a good way to do this.)'
`----
s_P
- Re: interactive-p and called-interactively-p, Stefan Monnier, 2009/09/01
- Re: interactive-p and called-interactively-p, Richard Stallman, 2009/09/01
- Re: interactive-p and called-interactively-p, Stefan Monnier, 2009/09/01
- Re: interactive-p and called-interactively-p, Richard Stallman, 2009/09/03
- Re: interactive-p and called-interactively-p, Stephen J. Turnbull, 2009/09/03
- Re: interactive-p and called-interactively-p, Stefan Monnier, 2009/09/03
- Re: interactive-p and called-interactively-p, Stephen J. Turnbull, 2009/09/03
- Re: interactive-p and called-interactively-p, Stefan Monnier, 2009/09/04
- Re: interactive-p and called-interactively-p, Glenn Morris, 2009/09/03
- Re: interactive-p and called-interactively-p, Stephen J. Turnbull, 2009/09/04
- Re: interactive-p and called-interactively-p,
MON KEY <=