Luc Teirlinck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Why are you putting the "prefix inverts sense of locate-prompt-for-command" > logic into the main function body, and not in the (interactive ...) code? > > I believe that was already the case before my patch is it not?
The old code didn't have an "arg" argument, so there's no argument compatibility to maintain -- and indeed that argues for introducing reasonable arguments now. The interactive operation is the same either way (the only difference being whether certain operations are done in the function body or the (interactive...) form). The only real difference as far as I can see is how the arguments are "captured" and re-used with `C-x ESC ESC' -- and your patch changes that behavior anyway (by capturing the state of current-prefix-arg instead of using the current value when C-x ESC ESC is used). The differences between your patch and what I'm suggesting only occur when the user does something weird: Invokes "locate" interactively, then _changes_ the value of locate-prompt-for-command, and attempts to re-invoke locate using `C-x ESC ESC'. I don't think either behavior is obviously more correct, so it seems reasonable to pick the cleanest in this case. -Miles -- A zen-buddhist walked into a pizza shop and said, "Make me one with everything." _______________________________________________ emacs-pretest-bug mailing list emacs-pretest-bug@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-pretest-bug
