Re: interactive-p

[Katsumi Yamaoka <yamaoka@jpl.org>]

>>>>> In <E1CS5QB-00083T-Ee@fencepost.gnu.org> Richard Stallman wrote:

>     I'm not quite sure what counts as bad uses.  Functions that change
>     their behavior surprisingly based on whether they're called
>     interactively or not?

> Please look at the latest commands.texi; it explains what is good
> and bad usage of interactive-p.  I updated it a week ago.

The "Interective Call" section of the Elisp manual mentions a
good example.  We've fixed bad usages of interactive-p in the
emacs-w3m modules about two years ago.  At that time, TSUCHIYA
Masatoshi showed another example as follows:

(defun foo ()
  (interactive)
  (message (if (interactive-p) "Interactrive" "Non Interactrive")))

(let ((ad-default-compilation-action 'never))
  (defadvice foo
    (around foo-wrapper activate)
    ad-do-it))

(symbol-function 'foo)
 => (lambda nil
      "$ad-doc: foo$"
      (interactive)
      (let (ad-return-value)
	(setq ad-return-value (ad-Orig-foo))
	ad-return-value))

Because of this, the foo command will never say "Interactrive".