From xemacs-m  Thu Sep 11 07:24:01 1997
Received: from jagor.srce.hr (hniksic@jagor.srce.hr [161.53.2.130])
	by xemacs.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id HAA07582
	for <xemacs-beta@xemacs.org>; Thu, 11 Sep 1997 07:23:55 -0500 (CDT)
Received: (from hniksic@localhost)
	by jagor.srce.hr (8.8.7/8.8.6) id OAA06918;
	Thu, 11 Sep 1997 14:23:15 +0200 (MET DST)
To: XEmacs Developers <xemacs-beta@xemacs.org>
Subject: Re: Menus (Was: PGP and mailcrypt)
References: <David Bakhash's message of "Wed, 10 Sep 1997 14:16:24 -0400 (EDT)"> 	<199709101653.MAA21409@scrubbing-bubbles.MIT.EDU> 	<m2en6xvzix.fsf@altair.xemacs.org> 	<kigsovdqcwr.fsf@jagor.srce.hr> 	<199709101816.OAA29257@department-of-alchemy.MIT.EDU> 	<3.0.3.32.19970910131304.0095fe90@158.58.62.23> 	<kigg1rcrgfd.fsf@jagor.srce.hr> <199709111209.IAA16838@buzzword-bingo.MIT.EDU>
X-Attribution: Hrvoje
X-Face: Mie8:rOV<\c/~z{s.X4A{!?vY7{drJ([U]0O=W/<W*SMo/Mv:58:*_y~ki>xDi&N7XG
        KV^$k0m3Oe/)'e%3=$PCR&3ITUXH,cK>]bci&<qQ>Ff%x_>1`T(+M2Gg/fgndU%k*ft
        [(7._6e0n-V%|%'[c|q:;}td$#INd+;?!-V=c8Pqf}3J
From: Hrvoje Niksic <hniksic@srce.hr>
Date: 11 Sep 1997 14:23:14 +0200
In-Reply-To: David Bakhash's message of "Thu, 11 Sep 1997 08:09:48 -0400 (EDT)"
Message-ID: <kiglo1482fh.fsf@jagor.srce.hr>
Lines: 39
X-Mailer: Gnus v5.4.65/XEmacs 20.3(beta19) - "Kyiv"

David Bakhash <cadet@MIT.EDU> writes:

> yes.  I have noticed that certain modes, like w3 and VM have excellent
> context-sensetivity and are just very robust.  Both of these examples
> work in GNU emacs as well, so the code is portable

Although I haven't seen the code in question, I highly doubt that it
is portable.  It is probably something like:

(if (string-match "XEmacs")
    (progn
      ...setup XEmacs menus...)
  ...setup GNU Emacs menus...)

> If easymenu can be written so that it is still compatible, but does
> not sacrifice any of the additional features that XEmacs has, then I
> say go for it.

It could be done, but how does one get Stallman to accede?  For that
matter, easymenu is pretty close to normal XEmacs menu syntax anyway.
If we could get him to accept `add-submenu' and others, life would be
easier for us.  But that is not likely to happen.

> Fix up easymenu and pray that XEmacs package authors change their
> code over.

No, the whole point of easymenu is compatibility.  If we have need of
introducing XEmacs-specific features to easymenu, we'd better just
stick to normal menu functions.

> But otherwise, I must agree w/ Hrvoje: compatibility is not my main
> interest either, though it's important.

As a user, I find it of no importance.

-- 
Hrvoje Niksic <hniksic@srce.hr> | Student at FER Zagreb, Croatia
--------------------------------+--------------------------------
I'm sure they'll listen to reason! -- Neal Stevenson, _Snow Crash_

