Thread: [CEDET-devel] Re: patch proposal
Brought to you by:
zappo
From: David P. <dav...@wa...> - 2004-06-29 13:30:39
|
[...] > That's a nifty idea. I was unaware you could restore the > minibuffer, but it makes good sense that it would be possible. > > I think restoration of the minibuffer to a previous value should be > the default for working. In light of this notion I also suspect that > the semantic-idle services should set things up so that `message' (via > advice perhaps?) was a temporary message whenever called from an idle > timer. That's a good idea. Perhaps semantic-idle services could just use `working-temp-message' instead of `message'? > In your patch, the implementation of `working-current-message' was > not provided. I am not sure to understand, the implementation of `working-current-message' is already provided in working.el. > Lastly, I am quite certain I will not have time to try anything for > a couple days. :( What a pity ;-) Anyway, I will check the patch in, so you could try it when you will have time. David |
From: Eric M. L. <er...@si...> - 2004-06-29 15:52:12
|
>>> David PONCE <dav...@wa...> seems to think that: >[...] >> That's a nifty idea. I was unaware you could restore the >> minibuffer, but it makes good sense that it would be possible. >> >> I think restoration of the minibuffer to a previous value should be >> the default for working. In light of this notion I also suspect that >> the semantic-idle services should set things up so that `message' (via >> advice perhaps?) was a temporary message whenever called from an idle >> timer. > >That's a good idea. Perhaps semantic-idle services could just use >`working-temp-message' instead of `message'? > >> In your patch, the implementation of `working-current-message' was >> not provided. > >I am not sure to understand, the implementation of >`working-current-message' is already provided in working.el. You are right. I suspect that was one of your contributes that has since slipped from my mind. It appears that all the working messages already put back what was there before. >> Lastly, I am quite certain I will not have time to try anything for >> a couple days. :( > >What a pity ;-) Anyway, I will check the patch in, so you could try >it when you will have time. [ ... ] Thanks Eric -- Eric Ludlam: za...@gn..., er...@si... Home: http://www.ludlam.net Siege: www.siege-engine.com Emacs: http://cedet.sourceforge.net GNU: www.gnu.org |