[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: When is setq-default a bad idea? (It seems to simplify things over p
|
From: |
Henrik Enberg |
|
Subject: |
Re: When is setq-default a bad idea? (It seems to simplify things over plain old setq.) |
|
Date: |
Mon, 12 Jan 2004 20:34:40 +0100 |
|
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.1006 (Gnus v5.10.6) Emacs/21.3.50 (gnu/linux) |
seberino@spawar.navy.mil (Christian Seberino) writes:
> If I use setq then I have to worry about minor modes and major modes
> overwriting my settings.
Only local variables are possibly overridden by modes. See the node
"Locals" in the Emacs manual for a comprehensive explanation of local
variables.
> It seems like setq-default is more comprehensive and overrides any
> attempted changes to variables elsewhere.
Not really. setq-default simply sets a default value of a variable, it
doesn't prevent changing that value later.
> When is it a problem if I use setq-default exclusively?
It's rather pointless with non-local variables, and uses more memory.