There are various places in conkeror (some user variables and hooks)
where the user specifies a function. Some of the features of
interactive commands would be useful for those functions; I wonder if it
would be useful to have a callback() function (analogous to interactive)
to define such functions. In particular, they could be given
documentation in this way (although its not clear how that documentation
should be presented).
Another feature of interactive that would be useful is the alternates
mechanism. For instance I usually want url_remoting_fn to
OPEN_NEW_BUFFER. But sometimes I want OPEN_NEW_BUFFER_BACKGROUND. I
currently use the code below, but alternates would be nicer.
Does this sound like something worth pursuing?
Examples of variables, other than hooks, that are expected to be set to
a function:
media_scrapers
read_url_handler_list
run_external_editor_function
url_remoting_fn
Current code that would be neater with alternates:
/* For url_remoting_fn; load in a new buffer. If -uu is given on the
* command line, do so in the background. */
function load_url_in_new_buffer_perhaps_bg(url, ctx) {
create_buffer_in_current_window(
buffer_creator(content_buffer, $load = url,
$configuration = ctx.config),
ctx.prefix_argument ? OPEN_NEW_BUFFER_BACKGROUND : OPEN_NEW_BUFFER,
!ctx.prefix_argument);
}
url_remoting_fn = load_url_in_new_buffer_perhaps_bg;
regards, David
_______________________________________________
Conkeror mailing list
Conkeror@...
https://www.mozdev.org/mailman/listinfo/conkeror
