From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Michael Heerdegen Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#14734: 24.3.50; REGRESSION: defadvice broken wrt doc strings (C-h f) Date: Sat, 29 Jun 2013 00:19:07 +0200 Message-ID: <87txkh515w.fsf@web.de> References: <9cf39b5d-d100-4b72-bf78-95f6cee0d8c0@default> <87a9mat176.fsf@yandex.ru> <45e03b9a-0b57-4ce9-b4da-04060fd902f7@default> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1372458010 32174 80.91.229.3 (28 Jun 2013 22:20:10 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 28 Jun 2013 22:20:10 +0000 (UTC) Cc: 14734@debbugs.gnu.org, Dmitry Gutov To: Drew Adams Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Jun 29 00:20:10 2013 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Ush1V-0000RL-0q for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Sat, 29 Jun 2013 00:20:09 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:39007 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Ush1U-0007fA-K7 for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Fri, 28 Jun 2013 18:20:08 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:39960) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Ush1Q-0007bx-Df for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 28 Jun 2013 18:20:06 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Ush1P-0005ZE-Aj for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 28 Jun 2013 18:20:04 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.43]:53068) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Ush1P-0005X6-70 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 28 Jun 2013 18:20:03 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1Ush1N-0007xr-VJ for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 28 Jun 2013 18:20:02 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Michael Heerdegen Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Fri, 28 Jun 2013 22:20:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 14734 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: wontfix Original-Received: via spool by 14734-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B14734.137245796230555 (code B ref 14734); Fri, 28 Jun 2013 22:20:01 +0000 Original-Received: (at 14734) by debbugs.gnu.org; 28 Jun 2013 22:19:22 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:47384 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1Ush0k-0007wk-3g for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 28 Jun 2013 18:19:22 -0400 Original-Received: from mout.web.de ([212.227.15.4]:56195) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1Ush0h-0007wS-Vg for 14734@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 28 Jun 2013 18:19:20 -0400 Original-Received: from drachen.dragon ([2.201.213.111]) by smtp.web.de (mrweb001) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0M7Kek-1U4s2L3tbS-00x6xp; Sat, 29 Jun 2013 00:19:12 +0200 In-Reply-To: <45e03b9a-0b57-4ce9-b4da-04060fd902f7@default> (Drew Adams's message of "Fri, 28 Jun 2013 14:56:55 -0700 (PDT)") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.3.50 (gnu/linux) X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:JqcYy2SU529RM/p6Fr0EcRuLj1ZfdYwDogGbpTjhRFLziPeL8vJ Htf3Ofn8EyqtYEzy8Fwspi5DCzvIu84VZ6e2vxsTtpqqdqWiDaJHyvI1AreRp90qUhgC+q5 UQCcgATnHz9FgGuaJQOxO3uRJ/63kgwey7KApPKvFtPafYstLjUqnWoOWyfHYjb4vUu6i20 kSB5MMXYNeARzgUOxNZJg== X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 3.x X-Received-From: 140.186.70.43 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.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.bugs:75694 Archived-At: Drew Adams writes: > And just why did something already implemented (and stable for years) > need to be REimplemented "for backward compatibility"? Why did adding > something new and different and presumably better require ALSO > reimplementing something that was already, by definition, backward > compatible? I had the same question - since reimplementing should have been a bit of work. But maintaining the reimplementation is probably much easier than doing so for the old package, so I can understand this decision. Michael.