Am Montag, 15. Oktober 2007 09:51 schrieb Andreas Röhler:
> It seems as `toggle-abbrev-mode' in GNU Emacs and
> `abbrev-mode' in XEmacs are reciprocal.
>
> As I'm going to adapt my GNU Emacs Lisp stuff to run at
> XEmacs too, I would like to keep the diffs as small as
> possible.
>
> I'm not going to say, abbrev-mode in XEmacs isn't as
> good as in GNU, rather I'm campaigning to take the
> X-way there.
>
> However, in cases were commands only differ by name,
> what about to give RMS the honour and simply follow GNU
> convention?
>
> Thanks all
>
> Andreas Röhler
>

Oh, sorry. That's my own forgotten alias I
disputed here.

Andreas Röhler

_______________________________________________
XEmacs-Beta mailing list
XEmacs-Beta@xemacs.org
http://calypso.tux.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xemacs-beta

> Adding emacs-devel because I think this is a more general policy question.
> In general some-mode and toggle-some-mode are different.  (some-mode nil)
> is equivalent to (toggle-some-mode), while (some-mode 1) and
> (some-mode -1) unconditionally turn it on and off respectively.  As far as
> I know, XEmacs tries to avoid the toggle-, turn-on-, turn-off-some-mode
> style.  I would prefer to avoid introducing it if Emacs is not actively
> promoting that style (in fact, I'd prefer to ask Emacs to do things our
> way, on principle, not out of laziness ;-).

I'm opposed to turn-on-foo-mode, turn-off-foo-mode, and toggle-foo-mode,
since the foo-mode function covers all 3 uses just fine.

This said, as far as I can tell, Emacs has no `toggle-abbrev-mode', so
I don't know what Andreas was talking about.

        Stefan

_______________________________________________
XEmacs-Beta mailing list
XEmacs-Beta@xemacs.org
http://calypso.tux.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xemacs-beta

It seems as `toggle-abbrev-mode' in GNU Emacs and
`abbrev-mode' in XEmacs are reciprocal.

As I'm going to adapt my GNU Emacs Lisp stuff to run at
XEmacs too, I would like to keep the diffs as small as
possible.

I'm not going to say, abbrev-mode in XEmacs isn't as
good as in GNU, rather I'm campaigning to take the
X-way there.

However, in cases were commands only differ by name,
what about to give RMS the honour and simply follow GNU
convention?

Thanks all

Andreas Röhler

_______________________________________________
XEmacs-Beta mailing list
XEmacs-Beta@xemacs.org
http://calypso.tux.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xemacs-beta