On Thu, Jul 09, 2009 at 03:20:44PM -0400, Peter S Galbraith wrote:
> Sami Liedes <slie...@cc.hut.fi> wrote:
> 
> > Package: emacs-goodies-el
> > Version: 30.0-1
> > Severity: normal
> > 
> > Hi,
> > 
> > The quack package for scheme programming is enabled by default even in
> > the non-aggressive state. It however is quite a bit different from
> > emacs' default scheme mode. Hence the package probably should only be
> > enabled in aggressive mode. (Moreover, I couldn't figure out in 15
> > minutes how to disable quack and use Emacs' default scheme mode.)
> > 
> >     Sami
> 
> Thanks for the report.  What is the main issue?  It is the following
> that should be optional?
> 
> (add-hook 'scheme-mode-hook          'quack-scheme-mode-hookfunc)
> (add-hook 'inferior-scheme-mode-hook 'quack-inferior-scheme-mode-hookfunc)
> 
> As I understand it, quack only adds to scheme-mode.  It doesn't replace
> it.  What is it adding that is counter-productive?  (Note that I have
> never used it or scheme-mode).

Well, I haven't inspected in detail, but have noticed at least a few
small differences:

1. The determination of which program to run for scheme is different.
   I.e. the setting for emacs' default scheme mode does not have an
   effect in quack. (Also it seems to remember, sometimes weirdly
   wrong, what my previous scheme program was.)

2. The default syntax highlighting seems to be quite different (less
   things highlighted). That's configurable though. Anyway it seems it
   overrides many settings of emacs' default scheme mode without
   warning (it took me quite long to figure out what the problem in #1
   was).

3. Don't know how important this is, but for example C-u 100 ( works
   differently :-) In emacs' default scheme mode it works, in quack it
   fails after one paren with "Unbalanced paretheses".

Generally just the problem was a kind of surprise when many things in
our scheme course didn't work in Emacs in the way they had described.
But the course personnel guessed (correctly) that the problem was
quack, which they described as "weird".

OTOH I guess a lot of people like it, so it might be sensible to have
it on by default (though I'd like a way to disable it, but now I know
what hooks to look at). But yeah, I think it changes the default
behavior incompatibly in at least some respects.

        Sami

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply via email to