GNU bug report logs - #47150
28.0.50; Incorrect major-mode in minibuffer

Previous Next

Package: emacs;

Reported by: styang <at> fastmail.com

Date: Mon, 15 Mar 2021 00:58:01 UTC

Severity: normal

Found in version 28.0.50

Done: Alan Mackenzie <acm <at> muc.de>

Bug is archived. No further changes may be made.

Full log


Message #20 received at 47150 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: "Sheng Yang" <styang <at> fastmail.com>
To: "Alan Mackenzie" <acm <at> muc.de>
Cc: 47150 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#47150: 28.0.50; Incorrect major-mode in minibuffer
Date: Mon, 15 Mar 2021 16:58:04 -0500
[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]
Hi Alan,

Thanks for the detailed explanation, everything makes sense now. I still would like to clarify the following

> As you say, there is (minibufferp).  What is wrong with that?
> 
> That does indeed suggest we really want a minibuffer-mode, rather than
> just fundamental-mode.  But surely, the parenthesis pairing will be
> dependant on the sort of text you're typing into the minibuffer, so it
> can't really be connected with, say, minibuffer-mode.
> 
> Sorry, I don't understand what you mean, here.  How will the use of
> (minibufferp) prevent anything else?

I am not suggesting anything wrong with (minibufferp). What I have in mind is that it would be better if there is a mode for the minibuffer, so that existing packages can still use *-modes, *-global-modes, *-inhibit-modes, etc. to decide whether to enable or disable some functionalities. I checked the several packages I mentioned, they either compare major-mode with minibuffer-inactive-mode directly, or use some *-modes variable that checks the major-mode. Their maintainers' life will be easier comparing to the case where only (minibufferp) is available and they are forced to make a corner case for the minibuffer.

> I hope my description in this post is satisfactory.
Yes, crystal clear!

> So, a quick summary: (i) the change in the minibuffer's major mode to
> fundamental-mode was intended; (ii) there may be some problems in some
> packages because of this; (iii) we aren't yet in agreement on how to
> proceed with this bug report.

(i)(ii) agreed.
(iii), I am mostly in support of removing minibuffer-inactive-mode and minibuffer-inactive-mode-map, and give the minibuffer a proper mode. This way, the maintainers' life will be easier. Another option is still remove minibuffer-inactive-mode and minibuffer-inactive-mode-map, but keep minibuffer in fundamental mode. What do you think?


Sheng Yang(杨圣), PhD
Computer Science Department
University of Maryland, College Park
E-mail: styang <at> fastmail.com
E-mail (old but still used): yangsheng6810 <at> gmail.com

[Message part 2 (text/html, inline)]

This bug report was last modified 4 years and 33 days ago.

Previous Next


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