On Tue, Jun 17, 2003 at 10:11:30AM +0000, Angus Leeming wrote: > This particular lfun also illustrates a different kind of usage of the > argument. Here its value is a property of the document and cannot be known > at compile time. In the case of LFUN_DIALOG_SHOW, however, argument can > take only certain, known, values which we can (and presumably therefore > should) test. > > Why not create another database of "permissible" args to certain lfuns? > Syntax would be something like: > dialog-show preferences NoBuffer > dialog-show latexlog ReadOnly > etc
Why not simply let the LFUN handler fail if the passed goto target is invalid or some dialog is not available or the buffer is r/o but the dialog wants r/w? This scheme looks a bit too complicated without enough benefits... Andre' -- Those who desire to give up Freedom in order to gain Security, will not have, nor do they deserve, either one. (T. Jefferson or B. Franklin or both...)
