> From: Philip Kaludercic <philipk@posteo.net> > Cc: jporterbugs@gmail.com, arash@gnu.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org, > joaotavora@gmail.com > Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2022 14:12:39 +0000 > > >> > . a multi-level list > >> > . elements that are alists > >> > . a "backquote construct" with evaluated parts in > >> > > >> > How much Lisp do we require a user to know? Imagine a user who just > >> > wants to add one more server, either for an existing mode or for a new > >> > mode not in the list. Do we really expect him or her to understand > >> > all that? > >> > >> For a simple modification, it appears that > >> > >> (add-to-list 'eglot-server-programs '(foo-mode "foo-lsp" "--stdio")) > >> > >> is enough. > > > > And we expect a random user to know this how? > > I believe it to be no more or less reasonable to know than how to > manipulate `auto-mode-alist', and that involves Elisp regular > expressions. I think this variable is way harder to grasp that auto-mode-alist. > > Probably. Which is why I think my original proposal, not to ask users > > to customize such variables directly, is much easier to implement. > > I don't think that either or differs too much in difficulty, this is > more a question of approach. I think adding infrastructure to Custom widgets is much harder than writing a :set function which adds an element to the likes of eglot-server-programs. But extensions of Custom in this direction will be most welcome, of course.
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