> Is walnut-summarize useful as an interactive command? Its only purpose is > to be used from the command line. I think making it available via M-x or > key bindings would only be so much clutter.
I take your point about clutter. I actually have used it interactively, but that's unusual and is probably mostly to do with development. Especially as the tests themselves don't (and shouldn't) have an interactive form, there's little point in the test summary having one. And I can always invoke it as a function via M-:. > What if this hypothetical -walnut-run option could accept either a > filename or a directory name as its argument? When a directory was given, > it would load *.js from that directory. Yes, I like that. > Would that also address the other questions you posted about the > deprecation of load_rc? It certainly addresses the first point. But implementing that looks like pulling load_rc apart again, and enquiring whether that was acceptable was part of the reason for my other message. I could also implement the chrome URL following along with that, which would address most of my second point. Regards, David _______________________________________________ Conkeror mailing list [email protected] https://www.mozdev.org/mailman/listinfo/conkeror
