Re: Documentation of nnoo.el

[Lars Ingebrigtsen]

Eric Abrahamsen <address@hidden> writes:

> Does this mean you'd rather not go all the way with EIEIO? Maybe just
> vectors or something?

EIEIO would be fine by me...

> Well that's the real crux, isn't it :) I'm happy to try banging together
> a preliminary example of how it might look. I don't think rewriting the
> backends would be as much work as adjusting pretty much everything else
> to use the new code.

Well, every reference to a server variable in the backends would need to
be rewritten as an object access instead, so there would be quite a lot
of churn on the backend side, too.  I kinda thing there wouldn't be as
much on the Gnus side...

>>> 1. First, only make backends into classes. This would give us the chance
>>>    to do away with the select-method/secondary-select-method
>>>    distinction, and just have a list of defined servers.
>>
>> I think that's a totally orthogonal issue.  We could do that now, but
>> it'd break the current naming scheme for the groups in Gnus.
>
> It is orthogonal, but on the other hand it would take extra effort to
> preserve. Do you mean the "nnml+ServerName:GroupName" scheme? I don't
> quite see how doing away with the primary/secondary distinction would
> affect that...

Groups from primary servers aren't prefixed, while groups from
non-primary servers are...

-- 
(domestic pets only, the antidote for overdose, milk.)
   bloggy blog: http://lars.ingebrigtsen.no