bug#19217: 25.0.50; `C-M-x' (`eval-defun') on a `defface' that is not top-level

[Stefan Monnier]

> I just did - when the defface (e.g. the given face itself) makes
> sense only for certain Emacs versions.

That just paraphrases in ambiguous English the perfectly precise Elisp
code you quoted.  So it's not what I'm after.

> It doesn't matter how common it is

It matters to me, obviously.

> - it is common enough.  There is no reason users should not have
> a simple way to redefine a defface, defvar, or defcustom, at top level
> or not.

Irrelevant.  Frequency of occurrence and typical contexts can give very
useful hints at what the best solution is.  The answer you quote already
makes it clear I agree it should be solved, so stop arguing this point,
you're just wasting people's time.

I stopped reading your rant here.


        Stefan