Thread: [jdee-users] Using `define-derived-mode'
Brought to you by:
paullandes
From: <lu...@gn...> - 2009-07-16 12:09:42
|
Hello, Is there any reason for not using `define-derived-mode' when defining `jde-mode'? (I see code that uses it is commented out.) It turns out that not using it can have undesirable side-effects and lead to "non-deterministic" behavior. What happened to me recently is that the first Java file I opened during my Emacs session was with `C-x C-f' from a Gnus *Group* buffer. Consequently, `jde-mode-map' inherited Gnus bindings, which, needless to say, is quite inconvenient. ;-) Thanks, Ludo'. |
From: <lu...@gn...> - 2009-08-14 11:11:38
|
Hi, lu...@gn... (Ludovic Courtès) writes: > Is there any reason for not using `define-derived-mode' when defining > `jde-mode'? (I see code that uses it is commented out.) > > It turns out that not using it can have undesirable side-effects and > lead to "non-deterministic" behavior. > > What happened to me recently is that the first Java file I opened during > my Emacs session was with `C-x C-f' from a Gnus *Group* buffer. > Consequently, `jde-mode-map' inherited Gnus bindings, which, needless to > say, is quite inconvenient. ;-) The attached patch (with stripped paths!) fixes that. Can someone review it? Thanks, Ludo'. |