Re: Failure building packages (Vin Shelton)
Mats Lidell writes:
>>>>> Stephen J Turnbull <stephen(a)xemacs.org>
writes:
> ... ready for use, not by my standards (documentation is
> lacking). They're also in a very primitive state, AFAIK users need
> to build up almost all the scaffolding themselves (kinda like
> defining a minor mode without using define-minor-mode).
Looks like an interesting project. There should not need to be that
much framework code to get it into something useful.
Some of it will be superficial and easy to kaizen (Japanese for
"improve gradually" if you're not familiar with the word).
There's a deeper project I've had in mind for a while, which is a mode
domain for specifiers. Currently if you have a specifier (say
comment-face's font) and want to change it for a given mode, you need
to map over all buffers in that mode and add a buffer-specific spec
for each one to the specifier. However, it should be possible to add
logic to check if the buffer is in a particular mode, and if so
instantiate that spec.
The specification problems here are somewhat knotty, though. Do we
want to count minor modes as modes for this purpose? Do they override
major modes? Since modes and frames aren't nested, which comes first
when searching? etc.
_______________________________________________
XEmacs-Beta mailing list
XEmacs-Beta(a)xemacs.org
http://lists.xemacs.org/mailman/listinfo/xemacs-beta