From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#48264: [PATCH v3 07/15] Add BVAR_OR_DEFAULT macro as a stub Date: Fri, 07 May 2021 16:32:25 +0300 Message-ID: <83mtt6brfa.fsf@gnu.org> References: <877dkbsj9d.fsf@catern.com> <20210506213346.9730-8-sbaugh@catern.com> <837dkaddbc.fsf@gnu.org> <87k0oar8x5.fsf@catern.com> <83pmy2bsci.fsf@gnu.org> <87czu2r825.fsf@catern.com> Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="5306"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: 48264@debbugs.gnu.org To: Spencer Baugh Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Fri May 07 15:33:15 2021 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 1lf0bT-0001Fe-0p for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Fri, 07 May 2021 15:33:15 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:40426 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lf0bR-0008Hl-TW for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Fri, 07 May 2021 09:33:13 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:45324) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lf0bJ-0008GO-KF for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 07 May 2021 09:33:05 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]:60616) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lf0bG-0005FP-IW for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 07 May 2021 09:33:05 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1lf0bG-0006qy-Fi for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 07 May 2021 09:33:02 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Eli Zaretskii Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Fri, 07 May 2021 13:33:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 48264 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs Original-Received: via spool by 48264-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B48264.162039435426336 (code B ref 48264); Fri, 07 May 2021 13:33:02 +0000 Original-Received: (at 48264) by debbugs.gnu.org; 7 May 2021 13:32:34 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:43928 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1lf0ao-0006qi-K6 for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 07 May 2021 09:32:34 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:36834) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1lf0am-0006qc-Uj for 48264@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 07 May 2021 09:32:33 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]:48114) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lf0ah-0004sU-PD; Fri, 07 May 2021 09:32:27 -0400 Original-Received: from 84.94.185.95.cable.012.net.il ([84.94.185.95]:4050 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.86_2) (envelope-from ) id 1lf0ah-0007FQ-Cs; Fri, 07 May 2021 09:32:27 -0400 In-Reply-To: <87czu2r825.fsf@catern.com> (message from Spencer Baugh on Fri, 07 May 2021 09:24:02 -0400) 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:205937 Archived-At: > From: Spencer Baugh > Cc: 48264@debbugs.gnu.org > Date: Fri, 07 May 2021 09:24:02 -0400 > > > I thought I asked you not to make changes that are overwritten by > > subsequent patches in the series, as it makes review harder. It also > > makes the supposedly separate changes in the set not really separate, > > because one cannot revert one of them and still have a functional > > Emacs. > > Sure, I can merge the two changes together, I'll do that for the next > revision of the series. Just felt this was easier to review. Shorter patches are easier to review, indeed. But if that requires making spurious changes that aren't really meant to be in the final version, the size of the diffs takes a back seat, because breaking the patches in smaller parts makes the reviewer look at changes that aren't real.