Michael Heerdegen <michael_heerdegen@web.de> writes:

> Thierry Volpiatto <thievol@posteo.net> writes:
>
>> A possible solution for this is adding two vars, insert-register-types
>> and jump-to-register-types and define register-type like this (named
>> register--type here):
>>
>> (defun register--type (register)
>>   ;; Call register/type against the register value.
>>   (register/type (if (consp (cdr register))
>>                      (cadr register)
>>                    (cdr register))))
>>
>> (cl-defgeneric register/type (regval))
>>
>> (cl-defmethod register/type ((regval string)) 'string)
>> (cl-defmethod register/type ((regval number)) 'number)
>> (cl-defmethod register/type ((regval marker)) 'marker)
>> (cl-defmethod register/type ((regval window-configuration)) 'window)
>> (cl-deftype frame-register () '(satisfies frameset-register-p))
>> (cl-defmethod register/type :extra "frame-register" (regval) 'frame)
>>
>> ;; set a new register and check its type like this:
>> (register--type (car register-alist))
>
> This looks promising.
>
> But I'm not sure whether the detour via type names (instead of an
> approach using only generics) is the best solution.  Why not define just
> a new generic (register-eligible-for-command-p REG COMMAND) and use that
> as predicate in the interactive specs of the commands (providing
> `this-command' as second arg)?  Seems simpler to me and still more
> extensible and controllable.

Not sure to understand what you want to do here.

We don't want to modify each command, and anyway I don't see what
(register-eligible-for-command-p REG COMMAND) would do in the
interactive spec of each command.

There is two things we want to make more flexible:

1) The ability to allow adding a new type of register and
use this type of register to filter out the register-alist according to
the command in use.

2) Allow one to add a new register command
and assign its type, message to use and action it
provide.

Example, if I want to define a new command register-delete:

    (defun register-delete (register)
      (interactive (list (register-read-with-preview "Delete register: ")))
      (setq register-alist (delete register register-alist)))

If I run this command I will have a minibuffer message "Overwrite
register <n>", this is not what I expect, I expect "Delete register
<n>".

So we need something to customize this.
I added a new var and a structure to achieve this, so now one can do in
e.g. its .emacs:

    (with-eval-after-load 'register
      (require 'register-preview)
      (add-to-list 'register-commands-data
                   `(register-delete
                     .
                     ,(make-register-preview-commands
                       :types '(all)
                       :msg "Delete register `%s'"
                       :act 'delete)))
      (defun register-delete (register)
        (interactive (list (register-read-with-preview "Delete register: ")))
        (setq register-alist (delete register register-alist))))


But maybe what you propose is simpler to achieve the two tasks above,
don't know.

-- 
Thierry