GNU bug report logs - #73098
setopt float warning unexpected

Previous Next

Full log

View this message in rfc822 format

From: Ship Mints <shipmints <at> gmail.com>
To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
Cc: Michael Heerdegen <michael_heerdegen <at> web.de>, 73098 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, Stefan Monnier <monnier <at> iro.umontreal.ca>
Subject: bug#73098: setopt float warning unexpected
Date: Mon, 9 Sep 2024 11:35:39 -0400

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

Perhaps an alternative macro `setopt-relaxed"? Documentation should suggest
contacting package authors to request improvements (it's a very slow
process to get misspecified packages updated and not all authors mean what
they say when they themselves don't use the customize system--this group
must know this all too well).

On Mon, Sep 9, 2024 at 11:28 AM Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org> wrote:

> > From: Michael Heerdegen <michael_heerdegen <at> web.de>
> > Cc: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>,  73098 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
> > Date: Mon, 09 Sep 2024 17:11:40 +0200
> >
> > Ship Mints <shipmints <at> gmail.com> writes:
> >
> > > I'm suggesting that there will be noise from people who convert from a
> > > working (setq some-package-option 2) to (setopt some-package-option
> > > 2). This is not a request to change the elisp type system, it is a
> > > request to consider if setopt's / customize internals should be
> > > relaxed to the equivalent of #'= for these simple cases.
> >
> > How about adding an option letting the user disable the type checking of
> > some options?
>
> Like what?  Would we accept, for example, a string where the type is
> 'symbol'?  Or any value where type is 'boolean'?
>
> And I'm also not sure we want this: presumably, if the defcustom's
> author specified a type, they meant it, no?
>
> Which is why I asked for opinions (but for now got only yours).
>
> Stefan, WDYT?
>

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

Previous Next

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