Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> writes: >> From: Philip Kaludercic <philipk@posteo.net> >> Cc: jporterbugs@gmail.com, arash@gnu.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org, >> joaotavora@gmail.com >> Date: Sat, 12 Nov 2022 13:46:40 +0000 >> >> >> (I'm not just talking about Eglot right now) If the default value is >> >> defined in an non-autoloaded variable, you have to load the library to >> >> access the value -- otherwise it simply wasn't loaded. >> >> >> >> The "issue" here is just that loading everything you want to modify >> >> during initialisation can get slow. >> > >> > Whether or not it is necessary to load the library depends on how the >> > :set function of the defcustom is implemented. I can see several ways >> > of implementing it that won't require loading the library right away, >> > and I'm sure you can see those ways as well. >> >> Actually no, I am not sure I do. > > Any way that stored the changes of the variable's value in a data > structure whose execution is deferred to when the library is first > loaded. This includes ` backquoted forms, eval-after-load, mode > hooks, etc. > >> > To me, this says that storing the value in a defcustom hits that >> > "issue" to which you were alluding, and for which I proposed a >> > solution of having the defcustom be an add-on to the baseline value. >> >> I see. The issue is that if I just set the user option directly, say >> even before loading the library I overwrite the default value. > > Once again, I'm talking about the user option being used to _augment_ > the default value of a variable. Such a user option should by default > have a nil value, so setting the value of the option doesn't overwrite > the baseline value of the variable which the option will augment. Ok. > I feel there's a misunderstanding here, because I don't see why these > obvious aspects need to be explained. So let me provide an example as > a possible clarification. That might very well be possible. > Under my proposal, the variable eglot-server-programs remains a > defvar, and contains the baseline list of the servers. To customize > the list, users change the value of a separate user option, say, > eglot-user-server-programs. This user option's value is nil by > default, and it allows users to specify both additions of servers to > the baseline value of eglot-server-programs and removal of servers > from that value. How would this look like? > The :set function of eglot-user-server-programs then > takes care of doing whatever is needed to make sure that the value of > eglot-server-programs is modified according to > eglot-user-server-programs's value when Eglot is started. This I understand, but I don't see how this is preferable to a general solution that doesn't require explicit support for any user option. >> >> Maybe I have missed something, if a user option has a `repeat' or >> >> `alist' type, you can't just say "append this and that value to the end >> >> of some other value". All you get to modify is the entire list, and all >> >> you get to store is the entire list. >> > >> > That's a job for the :set function of the defcustom. >> >> I am not sure I know what you are thinking of, but wouldn't this mean >> all user options that have already been marked as having a `repeat' or >> `alist' type, that these would now require an additional :set function? > > No, of course not. I didn't mean any changes to the infrastructure > that we use for Customize and user options in general. See above, I > hope I now explained what I had in mind. I suppose it does.
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4