> However, that would only help with uses of `call-interactively', not > uses of `interactive' itself.
I don't understand what you mean. `interactive' is just a specification. `call-interactively' interprets it. > It's probably not feasible (and I foresee immediate dismissal of the idea, > regardless of feasibility), but what about also having a mechanism to let > users extend (redefine) the predefined `interactive' code letters? > > For example, a user could define his own version of `b' in `(interactive > "b...")'. Instead of having to find all occurrences of `(interactive > "b...")' and replacing each of them with his own `(interactive (list > (my-read-buffer...)...)...)', he could just redefine what `(interactive > "b...")' means, in a single place. IOW, why not make the "bindings" between > the `interactive' code letters (e.g. `b') and their input-reading functions > available to users? Rewriting it in Lisp implies that you will be able to redefine default code letters easily if you want. -- Juri Linkov http://www.jurta.org/emacs/ _______________________________________________ Emacs-devel mailing list Emacs-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-devel
