Subject: bug#61549: 30.0.50; [PATCH] New keyboard macro counter functions

From: Eli Zaretskii <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 03 Jun 2024 14:33:20 +0300

> From: Michael Heerdegen <[email-masked]>
> Cc: Eli Zaretskii <[email-masked]>,  [email-masked],
>   [email-masked],  [email-masked]
> Date: Mon, 03 Jun 2024 01:33:54 +0200
> 
> Alex Bochannek <[email-masked]> writes:
> 
> > I hope this is the last iteration, but please let me know if there are
> > stylistic or implementation issues.
> 
> Sorry, but some more small questions from my side (please excuse my
> ignorance, I'm not a heavy user of keyboard macros so if any question
> doesn't make sense maybe I'm just on a wrong track):

Thanks, but please in the future try to chime in earlier, while the
patches are still being discussed.  I intentionally wait for at least
a week before doing something, and in this case the thread was going
on for much longer.

> (1) "kmacro-add-counter" and related functions... I wonder why these are
> not named "kmacro-increase-counter" - would that not be better
> understandable?  I mean, AFAIU, you do not add a counter but add
> something to an (or "the") counter.  But maybe I misunderstand.

If we want to rename this, IMO kmacro-add-to-counter is a better name.

> (2) `kmacro-reg-load-counter': I think I would expect a `user-error'
> being raised when the operation fails.  Unless that would get in the
> way in your use case (break recording or so, dunno).

No opinion here, as I don't use those, either.

> (3) I actually don't understand the usage of the
> `kmacro-reg-add-counter-*' named functions (did you, Eli?).  An example
> would maybe help.

Did you read the doc string before or after I install the changes?

> In addition I want to say the suggested manual additions are useful.
> Would it make sense to add at least some parts to the file header or
> some pieces to the docstrings, or as comments?

No, I think these are sufficiently obscure to not be in the manual.