From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Luc Teirlinck Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: with-output-to-temp-buffer [Re: reverting CJK input methods] Date: Mon, 10 May 2004 20:45:23 -0500 (CDT) Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+emacs-devel=quimby.gnus.org@gnu.org Message-ID: <200405110145.i4B1jNF22171@raven.dms.auburn.edu> References: <20040429.150303.42778779.wl@gnu.org> <200404300142.KAA01027@etlken.m17n.org> <87u0z1puxa.fsf@mail.jurta.org> <200404301326.WAA02744@etlken.m17n.org> <8765bga5tt.fsf@mail.jurta.org> <200405020157.KAA07108@etlken.m17n.org> <200405060505.OAA21188@etlken.m17n.org> <200405061310.WAA22378@etlken.m17n.org> <200405101213.VAA04125@etlken.m17n.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: deer.gmane.org X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1084240569 17971 80.91.224.253 (11 May 2004 01:56:09 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 11 May 2004 01:56:09 +0000 (UTC) Cc: juri@jurta.org, rms@gnu.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+emacs-devel=quimby.gnus.org@gnu.org Tue May 11 03:56:00 2004 Return-path: Original-Received: from quimby.gnus.org ([80.91.224.244]) by deer.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 1BNMUy-0004J9-00 for ; Tue, 11 May 2004 03:56:00 +0200 Original-Received: from monty-python.gnu.org ([199.232.76.173]) by quimby.gnus.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 1BNMUy-0008Kd-00 for ; Tue, 11 May 2004 03:56:00 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1BNMNp-0003xC-Pg for emacs-devel@quimby.gnus.org; Mon, 10 May 2004 21:48:37 -0400 Original-Received: from list by monty-python.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.34) id 1BNMNQ-0003wV-Ek for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 10 May 2004 21:48:12 -0400 Original-Received: from mail by monty-python.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.34) id 1BNMMu-0003qZ-Fl for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 10 May 2004 21:48:11 -0400 Original-Received: from [131.204.53.104] (helo=manatee.dms.auburn.edu) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1BNMKv-0003SQ-8k; Mon, 10 May 2004 21:45:37 -0400 Original-Received: from raven.dms.auburn.edu (raven.dms.auburn.edu [131.204.53.29]) by manatee.dms.auburn.edu (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i4B1jNTS029221; Mon, 10 May 2004 20:45:23 -0500 (CDT) Original-Received: (from teirllm@localhost) by raven.dms.auburn.edu (8.11.6+Sun/8.11.6) id i4B1jNF22171; Mon, 10 May 2004 20:45:23 -0500 (CDT) X-Authentication-Warning: raven.dms.auburn.edu: teirllm set sender to teirllm@dms.auburn.edu using -f Original-To: handa@m17n.org In-reply-to: <200405101213.VAA04125@etlken.m17n.org> (message from Kenichi Handa on Mon, 10 May 2004 21:13:00 +0900 (JST)) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.4 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+emacs-devel=quimby.gnus.org@gnu.org Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:23099 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:23099 Ken'ichi HANDA wrote: But I still believe it is better to change erase-buffer itself (perhaps it should delete all overlays too). Let's discuss it after the next release. I do not understand why we should wait till after the next release to make a decision on this issue. If we do not change `erase-buffer', then I suspect that we will have to bind inhibit-read-only to t around several calls to erase-buffer. When we would decide after the release to change erase-buffer, then not only would we have done all that work for nothing, but we even would have to do the additional work of undoing all these changes. Why can a _final_ decision not be made right now? We are talking about the best way to deal with existing bugs, not about a new feature, so the feature freeze is irrelevant. Sincerely, Luc.