* Frank Goenninger B6E7E58B-2238-413F-855D-B266D96B04D6@me.com : Wrote on Mon, 26 Oct 2009 09:29:34 +0100: | Am 26.10.2009 um 08:56 schrieb Levente Mészáros: | |> On Sun, Oct 25, 2009 at 7:26 PM, Madhu enometh@meer.net wrote: |>> |>> * "Tobias C. Rittweiler" 87r5srbax3.fsf@freebits.de : |>> Wrote on Sun, 25 Oct 2009 19:12:08 +0100: |>> |>> I'm not sure what youre asking, perhaps the flaw is in the way |>> restarts were designed by the writers of the framework, who probably |>> gave no thought to the issue and you are changing slime to fit that |>> flawed view of the world. |>> |>> I have not used those frameworks or looked at those tests. |>> |> It's really weird to read this discussion. |> |> You seem to be so sure about how others use slime/lisp (what they like |> or dislike) by extrapolating your own usage scenarios.
If you read carefully upthread I've stated in this thread is MY experience and MY usage scenario, which I have been carefully qualified. What makes you think I've extrapolated anything?
Tobias seems to recognize that the others usage scenarios are results of miscoding/not understanding how restart contours work.
| Why don't you |> put a variable there? Then both of you will be ok, and others can |> also choose according to their own preference. Keep the old behavior |> as default, and it's done. |> |> And if we are at it, why does SLDB give a number for restarts which do |> already have a 1 keystroke keybinding? |> q, a, c could just be written in place of the numbers, and those |> numbers could be saved for other restarts... but this would be my |> personal taste and I'm sure you can find arguments in your taste |> against it.
Because of consistency, you always want to invoke the innermost restart with 0. This is not always Q.
| Very well said. Thanks! Now back to the other two ... ;-)
Back to this one!
-- Madhu