From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Keisuke Nishida To: guile-emacs@sourceware.cygnus.com Subject: Re: scheme-describe-symbol Date: Mon, 01 May 2000 18:16:00 -0000 Message-id: References: <87zoqdgvp7.fsf@PC486.Niemitalo.LAN> <87em7pj5ma.fsf@PC486.Niemitalo.LAN> <87n1mbvp6q.fsf@PC486.Niemitalo.LAN> X-SW-Source: 2000-q2/msg00019.html Kalle Olavi Niemitalo writes: > > (foo bar) > > ^ > > One may want to search for `foo' when one type C-h f and for `bar' > > when one type C-h v. So I guess we should define one function > > `scheme-describe-object' and two commands `scheme-describe-function' > > and `scheme-describe-variable'. How about that? > > So the functions would default to different symbols when called > interactively, and would otherwise be identical? Hmm... I think > I'd prefer using the prefix argument to choose between them. Yes, they would. I don't think using the prefix argument is easier to use here. We use separate commands in Emacs Lisp, and I prefer the same key bindings as them. (I could customize them, though.) > Still... currently, C-h f explains Emacs functions and C-h C-i > explains non-Emacs symbols based on the major mode. I think this > is a good separation and C-h f should not be used for e.g. C > functions. If the only Emacs languages are Lisp and Scheme, do > we need a language selection menu? It would be simpler to have > `describe-function' on C-h f and `scheme-describe' on C-h d. > Except that doesn't solve M-:. Probably you are right. A variable in a language other than Lisp or Scheme cannot have a value within Emacs, so especially describe-variable may not be useful for those languages... I would prefer to type C-u M-: to choose a language (and default is decided by major-mode). > Would each buffer using the same major mode have its own instance > of the major-mode class? Possibly. We need to discuss this later on.