From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Juanma Barranquero Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: New function `emacs-version>=' Date: Sun, 04 May 2003 21:15:28 +0200 Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+emacs-devel=quimby.gnus.org@gnu.org Message-ID: <20030504015756.777B.LEKTU@terra.es> References: <20030503154455.C412.LEKTU@terra.es> <873cjwrp0x.fsf@tleepslib.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1052075708 6701 80.91.224.249 (4 May 2003 19:15:08 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 4 May 2003 19:15:08 +0000 (UTC) Cc: monnier+gnu/emacs@rum.cs.yale.edu Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+emacs-devel=quimby.gnus.org@gnu.org Sun May 04 21:15:05 2003 Return-path: Original-Received: from quimby.gnus.org ([80.91.224.244]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 19COwz-0001jo-00 for ; Sun, 04 May 2003 21:15:05 +0200 Original-Received: from monty-python.gnu.org ([199.232.76.173]) by quimby.gnus.org with esmtp (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian)) id 19COze-0007Hi-00 for ; Sun, 04 May 2003 21:17:50 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.10.13) id 19COxo-000155-06 for emacs-devel@quimby.gnus.org; Sun, 04 May 2003 15:15:56 -0400 Original-Received: from list by monty-python.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.10.13) id 19COxR-00014z-00 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 04 May 2003 15:15:33 -0400 Original-Received: from mail by monty-python.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.10.13) id 19COxP-00014Q-00 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 04 May 2003 15:15:32 -0400 Original-Received: from smtp.terra.es ([213.4.129.129] helo=tsmtp5.mail.isp) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.10.13) id 19COxP-00013u-00 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 04 May 2003 15:15:31 -0400 Original-Received: from [193.152.151.156] ([193.152.151.156]) by tsmtp5.mail.isp (terra.es) with ESMTP id HEDMTQ00.E49; Sun, 4 May 2003 21:15:26 +0200 Original-To: "Stephen J. Turnbull" In-Reply-To: <873cjwrp0x.fsf@tleepslib.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> X-Mailer: Becky! ver. 2.05.10 Original-cc: ehud@unix.mvs.co.il Original-cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1b5 Precedence: list List-Id: Emacs development discussions. List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: List-Unsubscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+emacs-devel=quimby.gnus.org@gnu.org Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:13683 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:13683 On Sun, 04 May 2003 01:08:46 +0900, "Stephen J. Turnbull" wrote: > Isn't one enough? :-) Yeah, it is, for some definition of enough :-) > The XEmacs Review practice wrt to emacs-version>= is to query the > patch author if a feature test couldn't be used instead. About half > the time in my experience the author makes a reasonable case (eg, if a > package depends on multiple features that all came available with a > certain version). Wouldn't, in that case, be enough to test for just *one* of these multiple features? > I like Stefan's idea though; I think I'm going to implement it. It > should sufficiently annoy people that they'll book up on Ben's new > suite of warning control APIs, too. :-) :-) But, honestly: I'm not deadly opposed to emacs-version>=, it's just I think most of the time it's the wrong test. Adding the function amounts to encouraging its use, unless Stefan's idea (or any strong variant) is also implemented. /L/e/k/t/u