GNU bug report logs - #25032
25.1; `bookmark-set-internal', `bookmark-set-no-overwrite'

Previous Next

Full log

View this message in rfc822 format

From: help-debbugs <at> gnu.org (GNU bug Tracking System)
To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
Cc: tracker <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: bug#25032: closed (25.1; `bookmark-set-internal', `bookmark-set-no-overwrite')
Date: Sat, 06 Jul 2019 08:57:02 +0000

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

Your message dated Sat, 06 Jul 2019 11:55:53 +0300
with message-id <83tvbz8rty.fsf <at> gnu.org>
and subject line Re: bug#25032: 25.1; `bookmark-set-internal', `bookmark-set-no-overwrite'
has caused the debbugs.gnu.org bug report #25032,
regarding 25.1; `bookmark-set-internal', `bookmark-set-no-overwrite'
to be marked as done.

(If you believe you have received this mail in error, please contact
help-debbugs <at> gnu.org.)


-- 
25032: http://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=25032
GNU Bug Tracking System
Contact help-debbugs <at> gnu.org with problems

[Message part 2 (message/rfc822, inline)]

From: Drew Adams <drew.adams <at> oracle.com>
To: bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org
Subject: 25.1; `bookmark-set-internal', `bookmark-set-no-overwrite'
Date: Fri, 25 Nov 2016 16:21:12 -0800 (PST)

1. Why is "internal" function `bookmark-set-internal' a _command_
   (interactive)?  What sense does an "internal" command make?  It seems
   that the `interactive' spec here was a copy+paste mistake.  It should
   be removed, I think.

2. The `interactive' spec for `bookmark-set-internal' seems wrong
   anyway.  NAME is the raw prefix arg?  And then NAME is simply taken
   as is (as STR) and compared using `string-equal'?  This cannot be
   correct.

3. Similarly, why does the doc string of `bookmark-set-internal' say
   "_Interactively_..."?  It should just say that it prompts for a
   bookmark name and then...  And "error" is not easily and commonly
   understood as a verb - use "raise an error" instead.

4. `bookmark-set-internal' should preferably not accept both args PROMPT
   and NAME.  If NAME is present (e.g. for non-interactive use of
   `bookmark-set') then PROMPT makes no sense and is not used (and the
   doc string is wrong about PROMPT in that case).
   
5. In `bookmark-set-internal', a nil third arg should have been used to
   mean overwrite, not raise an error, as overwriting is still, and
   always has been, the default behavior of `bookmark-set'.  You should
   have introduced the new value `error', not the new value `overwrite',
   and kept the default (nil) behavior as overwriting.

   You will no doubt argue that this does not matter because
   `bookmark-set-internal' is "internal".  But the main command is
   still, and should still be `bookmark-set'.  `bookmark-set-internal'
   should reflect _its_ behavior for the default case (nil).

6. Error messages, like other messages, should not end with a period.

No doubt it is "too late" for #4 and #5.  Hopefully not for the rest.


In GNU Emacs 25.1.1 (x86_64-w64-mingw32)
 of 2016-09-17 built on LAPHROAIG
Windowing system distributor 'Microsoft Corp.', version 6.1.7601
Configured using:
 'configure --without-dbus --without-compress-install CFLAGS=-static'

[Message part 3 (message/rfc822, inline)]

From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
To: Stefan Kangas <stefan <at> marxist.se>
Cc: drew.adams <at> oracle.com, 25032-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#25032: 25.1;
 `bookmark-set-internal', `bookmark-set-no-overwrite'
Date: Sat, 06 Jul 2019 11:55:53 +0300

> From: Stefan Kangas <stefan <at> marxist.se>
> Date: Tue, 2 Jul 2019 19:07:57 +0200
> Cc: Drew Adams <drew.adams <at> oracle.com>, 25032 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
> 
> Thanks for the review; attached an updated version.

Thanks, I pushed this to the master branch.

Previous Next

GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.