GNU bug report logs -
#24902
25.1; C-x = for Unicode
Previous Next
Full log
Message #69 received at 24902 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):
Mattias Engdegård <mattiase <at> acm.org> writes:
> 1. It doesn't fit the problem very well: neither the traditional nor
> the new format are easily expressed with format-spec since they are
> conditional in several ways (fields or strings that appear depending
> on the circumstances). In contrast, conditions are easily expressible
> in Lisp.
The format we're settling on doesn't have to be identical to the one we
have today. Defaulting to, say, the
Char: e (101, #o145, #x65) point=818 of 2005 (41%) column=60
might be OK.
> 2. Even if we went through the contortions to make formats expressible
> in format-spec, it still wouldn't be very easy to do so, especially
> compared to choosing a ready-made format. For more advanced
> customisation, Lisp is probably preferable.
Writing code is always better for programmers, but non-programmers can
put together format-spec things easier.
> 3. As any designer knows, customisability is a cop-out: it's an
> abdication of responsibility. The user can now conveniently be blamed
> for any perceived shortcoming. Conversely, being forced to think and
> make hard choices is much of what design is about, and users like when
> it's done for them in a competent way.
I know what you mean, but of course I want to have a good default. I
just doubt that there's any point in adding more than one "standard
format" -- people that want to tweak stuff like this really wants to
tweak stuff like this. Trying to figure out all formats a user might
want is futile (and ultimately user-hostile).
--
(domestic pets only, the antidote for overdose, milk.)
bloggy blog: http://lars.ingebrigtsen.no
This bug report was last modified 3 years and 112 days ago.
Previous Next
GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham,
1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd,
1994-97 Ian Jackson.