On Sun Feb 6 2011 Antoine Levitt wrote: > > Currently bbdb-complete-mail (the new name of bbdb-complete-name) > > really has no well-defined return values whatsoever. Would it help > > if it returned non-nil whenever it had done "something"? Would this > > be the right thing?? > > I believe it would. That's the way other completions framework behave, > and certainly the way message expects it to. But then again, I'm no > expert on these things, and maybe other MUA have different expectations. > > In any event, a simple "t" after (run-hooks 'bbdb-complete-mail-hook) > does the trick, but it probably needs to be changed in some other > places.
Thanks, I'll try to look into this more carefully. It'll be easy to add a return value of "always t", though it's my gut feeling that the return value should be non-zero only if bbdb-complete-mail had done "something" (so that another completion command can take over). Roland ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ The modern datacenter depends on network connectivity to access resources and provide services. The best practices for maximizing a physical server's connectivity to a physical network are well understood - see how these rules translate into the virtual world? http://p.sf.net/sfu/oracle-sfdevnlfb _______________________________________________ bbdb-info@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bbdb-info BBDB Home Page: http://bbdb.sourceforge.net/
