Re: Info-mode patch

[Eli Zaretskii]

> From: Arthur Miller <arthur.miller@live.com>
> Cc: Juri Linkov <juri@linkov.net>,  emacs-devel@gnu.org
> Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2023 14:15:37 +0200
> 
> Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> writes:
> 
> >> From: Juri Linkov <juri@linkov.net>
> >> Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org
> >> Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2023 20:56:19 +0300
> >> 
> >> > -(defun Info-directory ()
> >> > +(defun Info-directory (&optional window)
> >> >    "Go to the Info directory node."
> >> >    (interactive)
> >> > -  (Info-find-node "dir" "top"))
> >> > +  (with-selected-window (or window (info-window))
> >> > +    (Info-find-node "dir" "top")))
> >> 
> >> I wonder why you modified a lot of commands instead of implementing
> >> a non-intrusive approach of creating standard wrapper commands like
> >> 
> >>   (defun Info-directory-other-window (&optional window)
> >>      "Go to the Info directory node in another window."
> >>      (interactive)
> >>      (with-selected-window (or window (info-window))
> >>        (Info-directory)))
> >
> > Someone, I think it was Stefan, suggested to use a kind of "universal
> > window argument", similar to "C-x RET c" (which is bound to
> > universal-coding-system-argument, and allows to specify a
> > coding-system for the next command.  Wouldn't that approach resulted
> > in a cleaner, more elegant solution?
> 
> In my personal opinion, after wrestling with this, I don't think there is one
> single "unisex" modell for all. As I see Lisp functions, especially 
> interactive
> commands in Emacs, they are more akin to applications, or small shell scripts,
> that can basically do whatever they want. Some of them work on buffers, some 
> on
> windows, some can just download stuff from the web. With other words, they
> should be looked at individually what they do, on case by case basis.
> 
> It can also happen that wrapping ends up in as much work, just different in 
> the
> long run. One has to create wrappers, in some cases not so trivial, otherwise
> user will be thrown between minibuffers on different frames, which I don't 
> think
> would be pretty from the user perspective, then there is the manual and docs
> everything etc. It can happen that it is not much less work that has to be 
> done,
> but just different work, and it can also happen that it ends up in glitches on
> some window managers as described in the original mail and response to Juri.

I think you are trying to solve a much wider, more general, and more
hard problem than you need to.  Remember, this started as a feature to
allow the user invoke help-mode and Info-mode commands from a window
other than the one showing (help* or *info* buffers.  You are
describing issues far away from that.

> By the way, I could possible remove that optional "window" argument in those 
> few
> functions that introduce it and use plist as I did in some other place; it was
> just a convenience. In that case no signatures are changed at all; no need to
> change the manual, possibly it is enough to just mention in News that 
> info/help
> commands are callable from other buffers.

The "universal-window-argument" suggestion is precisely so you could
pass such a "window argument" without actually touching the signature
of the functions.