GNU bug report logs -
#57502
29.0.50; Issue with `or' clause of buffer-match-p
Previous Next
Reported by: Augusto Stoffel <arstoffel <at> gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 31 Aug 2022 12:03:02 UTC
Severity: normal
Found in version 29.0.50
Done: Philip Kaludercic <philipk <at> posteo.net>
Bug is archived. No further changes may be made.
Full log
View this message in rfc822 format
Augusto Stoffel <arstoffel <at> gmail.com> writes:
> On Wed, 31 Aug 2022 at 12:50, Philip Kaludercic <philipk <at> posteo.net> wrote:
>
>> That might look something like this:
>>
> [...]
>> + (`(derived-mode . ,mode)
>> + (provided-mode-derived-p
>> + (buffer-local-value 'major-mode buffer)
>> + mode))
>
> On a tangent, wouldn't it be nice to allow a list of modes? That is,
>
>> + (`(derived-mode . ,modes)
>> + (apply #'provided-mode-derived-p
>> + (buffer-local-value 'major-mode buffer)
>> + modes))
>
> (with some extra care to keep backwards compatibility).
Intuitively I feel as though this could be more problematic/confusing
than convenient. If this is done, then it should be supported in every
case, so that
(and (derived-mode foo-mode)
(major-mode . bar-mode))
(I know this is a stupid example) doesn't make someone want to try
(and (derived-mode foo-mode)
(major-mode bar-mode))
and be confused why it fails.
This bug report was last modified 2 years and 320 days ago.
Previous Next
GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham,
1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd,
1994-97 Ian Jackson.