Re: Hideshow

Cleaning Cc's, we all read the list. Hrvoje> Creating a dumbed-down API implementable on both versions Hrvoje> is of course possible, but that approach is not without Hrvoje> problems. Whenever I see "easymenu" used anywhere, I Hrvoje> flinch. I don't like easymenu at all. But I think the reason is that easymenu is clearly written by someone who wants the programs they wrote for a VW Beetle to drive a Porsche 944. There's just no way to make the thing Autobahn-ready, even if you've got the engine for it. But we've usually refused to do the reverse. We'd rather suffer with our low-level glyph/image/specifier interfaces than provide something saner/higher-level that could smoothly handle what GNU images, menus, etc can do, while making access to the XEmacs facilities convenient. Hrvoje> Not really; for example, they use keymaps to implement Hrvoje> menus. "Why doesn't XEmacs have `define-key-after'?" And toolbars. But do people really use `define-key-after' to define _keys_? If we provided a decent compatible interface abstracted to toolbars or menus, don't you think there's a reasonable chance that 3rd party maintainers would be happy to forget the existence of such cruft entirely? -- Institute of Policy and Planning Sciences http://turnbull.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp University of Tsukuba Tennodai 1-1-1 Tsukuba 305-8573 JAPAN Ask not how you can "do" free software business; ask what your business can "do for" free software.