From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Dmitry Gutov Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#41531: 27.0.91; Better handle asynchronous eldoc backends Date: Wed, 8 Jul 2020 02:11:11 +0300 Message-ID: <5a258c2b-39e7-76d7-0867-181ae3171710@yandex.ru> References: <875zckuet9.fsf@gmail.com> <87sgecssch.fsf@gmail.com> <87tuynsdp6.fsf@gmail.com> <5d768a69-3574-10c5-e80a-8ab77ec60462@yandex.ru> <87h7umop62.fsf@gmail.com> <671983cf-e4f5-f128-541b-ceac793f35e5@yandex.ru> <877dvfiofy.fsf@gmail.com> <3211602a-ccc6-aa53-d192-77f27c2060ce@yandex.ru> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="7938"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.8.0 Cc: 41531@debbugs.gnu.org, =?UTF-8?Q?Jo=C3=A3o_?= =?UTF-8?Q?T=C3=A1vora?= , andreyk.mad@gmail.com To: Stefan Monnier Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Wed Jul 08 01:12:19 2020 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1jswl9-0001yP-5J for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Wed, 08 Jul 2020 01:12:19 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:52956 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jswl8-0002dq-5v for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Tue, 07 Jul 2020 19:12:18 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:35676) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jswkt-0002bV-26 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 07 Jul 2020 19:12:03 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]:53677) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jswks-0001Ti-Og for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 07 Jul 2020 19:12:02 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1jswks-0003Qn-KF for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 07 Jul 2020 19:12:02 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Dmitry Gutov Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Tue, 07 Jul 2020 23:12:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 41531 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs Original-Received: via spool by 41531-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B41531.159416348013117 (code B ref 41531); Tue, 07 Jul 2020 23:12:02 +0000 Original-Received: (at 41531) by debbugs.gnu.org; 7 Jul 2020 23:11:20 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:36988 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1jswkC-0003PV-Kb for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 07 Jul 2020 19:11:20 -0400 Original-Received: from mail-wm1-f52.google.com ([209.85.128.52]:53856) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1jswkA-0003PG-VR for 41531@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 07 Jul 2020 19:11:19 -0400 Original-Received: by mail-wm1-f52.google.com with SMTP id j18so986923wmi.3 for <41531@debbugs.gnu.org>; Tue, 07 Jul 2020 16:11:18 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=sender:subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language:content-transfer-encoding; bh=nVZ2kI+DAIGADUfmh08z8jHQMsnedOR1vrSwW7Ki33E=; b=uObmKMh6d7oPC1xfFBLhT0ZR9Kvl62LwLEcFZWq0V9N9isJc85ZiGV5Ya0stQX6BX7 51JUA/IWcGolmGAI8JCHjcgVHPc1r/snW7jQZjakS9Msb3CR1PhJmc7R53qLeyTLtvmA mm/lK1x1+ET/q5jpcB54C1QHYCIbAVabnUqARwi6xKzDmRM/jzvDbbQKk3E8oRzHeBU9 lXLdtUc6IizJCf6UFD1NeC8OefTli7n4r9K8JFj1yP/EcQYY+oX17ZDLhkJSyEi0gTwx O5m8cWGg6qm8/G0Jp88BElitL33UcI30naw5BBvc71g7V/prIhrhA8P7wkVRrwSC/aEv 1H2w== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:sender:subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id :date:user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language :content-transfer-encoding; bh=nVZ2kI+DAIGADUfmh08z8jHQMsnedOR1vrSwW7Ki33E=; b=q/RCB7khME6muuB+qwKzTS5D1fKad2wh5phUpNAXYs5ZKpEuNHNZwHAhYmXlUDxiwy LgvgtJHS5josJZjWLv7g0XJTEw9etPervXMBm8T0ntWmHftymF/VpYIcTb2hRaYNK2Lg Khu+pcyj0ieXGbIf89P4ARocXrFI+4VmynqD5izfCOSmhqx28HD6mdwZk/XtqmkV5VDS ic73ju/gp56utHew3AbhtWFb8LYOMmSXDi2Hgqu8BRGSnrgGzHx1x9Rddl7kVpNu3/NY K8/4VSWmQFaJRHuBWixAt3dwb3O0+FFPWYa9tgCz/2Zh1oB+qlijDHx8FZonnVNDWoOE DpPg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533a4NGXKRj8SqwGhOTbyCoqZgxL+LxhwPCTW7TiuBVntt++o90M BM28rCWHSFBeIXhXJuQw9Fs= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJz5517bNzpPLWyMX86nNJT9ACUV+nXxlEAZXJN/zRGn+YKrYTjZdsOGjxqomYmu4ugUvxgAQw== X-Received: by 2002:a7b:c013:: with SMTP id c19mr6223505wmb.158.1594163473089; Tue, 07 Jul 2020 16:11:13 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: from [192.168.0.3] ([66.205.73.129]) by smtp.googlemail.com with ESMTPSA id c136sm3185519wmd.10.2020.07.07.16.11.11 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 07 Jul 2020 16:11:12 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: Content-Language: en-US X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list X-BeenThere: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org List-Id: "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "bug-gnu-emacs" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.bugs:182818 Archived-At: On 07.07.2020 19:07, Stefan Monnier wrote: >> But I fear we wouldn't be able to roll back the related decisions >> so easily, however. > I don't see any reason to fear that. The more time we spend discussing > what the ideal should look like, the less time we have to actually > get there. Given we can't even agree on the acceptance criteria, how would the rollback process look? Another "let's get it merged, folks"? With nobody particular in charge of Eldoc except maybe for Joao now? Who will of course be ecstatic to change the API to one he explicitly disliked in the beginning. > The current eldoc-async branch doesn't get us further from the ideal, > I believe, unless `emacs-28` gets cut before we get our act together. > > But if we don't get our act together before `emacs-28` then the > alternative is to have Emacs-28 without support for async eldoc, which > I think is even worse. Why you don't consider the alternative with less invasive changes, is beyond my understanding. > I recommend we try and be pragmatic. Especially since it will make us > all happier (instead of arguing against each other, we get to work on > improving the code). I wouldn't call the definition of eldoc-print-current-symbol-info in this branch an improvement over anything.