Alex Kost <alez...@gmail.com> skribis: > Ludovic Courtès (2014-10-29 19:25 +0300) wrote: > >> Hello, >> >> What would think of a patch like this: > > [...] > >> (defun guix-info-insert-entry (entry entry-type &optional indent-level) >> "Insert ENTRY of ENTRY-TYPE into the current info buffer. >> If INDENT-LEVEL is non-nil, indent displayed information by this >> number of `guix-info-indent' spaces." >> (let ((region-beg (point))) >> + (guix-info-insert-heading entry) >> (mapc (lambda (param) >> - (guix-info-insert-param param entry entry-type)) >> + ;; The name, version, and synopsis are already displayed. >> + (unless (memq param '(name version synopsis)) >> + (guix-info-insert-param param entry entry-type))) >> (guix-info-get-displayed-params entry-type)) >> (when indent-level >> (indent-rigidly region-beg (point) > > ‘guix-info-insert-entry’ is used to insert any type of information, not > only packages, so you can see artifacts (empty lines and "–") in other > "views".
Ah, OK. > I'm attaching the modified version of your patch. I added there several > variables that allow a user to specify functions for displaying info > (perhaps there will be several variants of displaying info in the > future). So if someone would like to return to the previous variant of > displaying a package, he could do it with: > > (setq guix-info-insert-package-function nil) Sounds good! > Thanks again, I really like your suggestion, I just prefer to keep > previous possibilities instead of replacing them with the new ones. Yes, why not. I’m a bit concerned about the cost of keeping several variants of different things, esp. because in practice almost only one variant would be tested. WDYT? > Are you going to make a commit or should I do it? (of course if you > don't have comments on my patch) Please go ahead! I’m thinking perhaps we should do something similar for the description itself, like display it right below the synopsis. Thoughts? Thanks, Ludo’.
