GNU bug report logs -
#16797
24.3.50; `emacs-lisp-mode' does not derive from `lisp-mode'
Previous Next
Reported by: Drew Adams <drew.adams <at> oracle.com>
Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2014 18:14:01 UTC
Severity: wishlist
Found in version 24.3.50
Done: Lars Ingebrigtsen <larsi <at> gnus.org>
Bug is archived. No further changes may be made.
To add a comment to this bug, you must first unarchive it, by sending
a message to control AT debbugs.gnu.org, with unarchive 16797 in the body.
You can then email your comments to 16797 AT debbugs.gnu.org in the normal way.
Toggle the display of automated, internal messages from the tracker.
Report forwarded
to
bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org
:
bug#16797
; Package
emacs
.
(Tue, 18 Feb 2014 18:14:01 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Acknowledgement sent
to
Drew Adams <drew.adams <at> oracle.com>
:
New bug report received and forwarded. Copy sent to
bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org
.
(Tue, 18 Feb 2014 18:14:02 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Message #5 received at submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):
This is as much a question as a bug report, but this seems a better
place to ask it than emacs-devel <at> gnu.org:
Why is `emacs-lisp-mode' derived from `prog-mode' and not `lisp-mode'?
To test whether, e.g., the current buffer is one where you could
evaluate a Lisp sexp in it, you would need to test whether the current
mode is derived from one or the other of these two Lisp modes.
Seems like `lisp-mode' should in some sense "encompass"
`emacs-lisp-mode', and perhaps any other Lisp modes as well.
Feel free to close this, if it does not in fact report a bug.
But in that case I would like to know what the reason is.
In GNU Emacs 24.3.50.1 (i686-pc-mingw32)
of 2014-02-11 on ODIEONE
Bzr revision: 116410 lekktu <at> gmail.com-20140211204823-l9l2s6tktfitq266
Windowing system distributor `Microsoft Corp.', version 6.1.7601
Configured using:
`configure --prefix=/c/Devel/emacs/binary --enable-checking=yes,glyphs
'CFLAGS=-O0 -g3' LDFLAGS=-Lc:/Devel/emacs/lib
CPPFLAGS=-Ic:/Devel/emacs/include'
Information forwarded
to
bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org
:
bug#16797
; Package
emacs
.
(Wed, 19 Feb 2014 14:26:01 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Message #8 received at 16797 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):
> This is as much a question as a bug report, but this seems a better
> place to ask it than emacs-devel <at> gnu.org:
> Why is `emacs-lisp-mode' derived from `prog-mode' and not `lisp-mode'?
Hysterical raisins?
We could/should probably restructure it a bit, with a common ancestor
`lisp-mode' and then have scheme-mode, emacs-lisp-mode, and
common-lisp-mode derive from it.
Patch welcome (after the unfreeze),
Stefan
Information forwarded
to
bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org
:
bug#16797
; Package
emacs
.
(Wed, 12 Aug 2020 22:13:02 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Message #11 received at 16797 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):
Stefan Monnier <monnier <at> iro.umontreal.ca> writes:
>> This is as much a question as a bug report, but this seems a better
>> place to ask it than emacs-devel <at> gnu.org:
>> Why is `emacs-lisp-mode' derived from `prog-mode' and not `lisp-mode'?
>
> Hysterical raisins?
>
> We could/should probably restructure it a bit, with a common ancestor
> `lisp-mode' and then have scheme-mode, emacs-lisp-mode, and
> common-lisp-mode derive from it.
>
> Patch welcome (after the unfreeze),
Is this still relevant now that emacs-lisp-mode inherits lisp-data-mode
(which inherits prog-mode)?
Best regards,
Stefan Kangas
Information forwarded
to
bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org
:
bug#16797
; Package
emacs
.
(Thu, 15 Jul 2021 05:02:01 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Message #14 received at 16797 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):
Stefan Kangas <stefan <at> marxist.se> writes:
>> We could/should probably restructure it a bit, with a common ancestor
>> `lisp-mode' and then have scheme-mode, emacs-lisp-mode, and
>> common-lisp-mode derive from it.
>>
>> Patch welcome (after the unfreeze),
>
> Is this still relevant now that emacs-lisp-mode inherits lisp-data-mode
> (which inherits prog-mode)?
No, I don't think so -- especially since we recently decided that
`lisp-mode' was really for Common Lisp.
So I'm closing this bug report.
--
(domestic pets only, the antidote for overdose, milk.)
bloggy blog: http://lars.ingebrigtsen.no
bug closed, send any further explanations to
16797 <at> debbugs.gnu.org and Drew Adams <drew.adams <at> oracle.com>
Request was from
Lars Ingebrigtsen <larsi <at> gnus.org>
to
control <at> debbugs.gnu.org
.
(Thu, 15 Jul 2021 05:02:02 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
bug archived.
Request was from
Debbugs Internal Request <help-debbugs <at> gnu.org>
to
internal_control <at> debbugs.gnu.org
.
(Thu, 12 Aug 2021 11:24:10 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
This bug report was last modified 2 years and 229 days ago.
Previous Next
GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham,
1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd,
1994-97 Ian Jackson.