Re: That gutter again
Stephen J. Turnbull writes:
[...]
It probably would be possible to get setq to recognize specifiers, but
it's not clear what it should do with them. Is it unacceptable to
have to use a different interface, which would preferably be as simple
as `setq', say `(set-specifier-somehow-do-the-right-thing spec value)'
(at least with optional args defaulted)?
This is what set-specifier is designed to do. You can mostly
avoid calling add-spec-list-to-specifier and other things that
require full blown specifier specs. (set-specifier spec nil)
usually gets the job done. Ben did a really nice job with this.