From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Dan Nicolaescu Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: RFC: status icon support Date: Sat, 12 Jan 2008 05:52:13 -0800 Message-ID: <200801121352.m0CDqERq011212@oogie-boogie.ics.uci.edu> References: <200801120157.m0C1v6WL020654@oogie-boogie.ics.uci.edu> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1200145967 5045 80.91.229.12 (12 Jan 2008 13:52:47 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 12 Jan 2008 13:52:47 +0000 (UTC) Cc: tromey@redhat.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: rms@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Jan 12 14:53:09 2008 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1JDgnK-00066i-OT for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 12 Jan 2008 14:53:07 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JDgmw-0000vP-L5 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 12 Jan 2008 08:52:42 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1JDgmr-0000uk-Ms for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 12 Jan 2008 08:52:37 -0500 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1JDgmp-0000uG-5O for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 12 Jan 2008 08:52:36 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JDgmo-0000u6-VS for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 12 Jan 2008 08:52:35 -0500 Original-Received: from oogie-boogie.ics.uci.edu ([128.195.1.41]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1JDgml-00060N-3X; Sat, 12 Jan 2008 08:52:31 -0500 Original-Received: from mothra.ics.uci.edu (mothra.ics.uci.edu [128.195.6.93]) by oogie-boogie.ics.uci.edu (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id m0CDqERq011212; Sat, 12 Jan 2008 05:52:14 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: (Richard Stallman's message of "Sat, 12 Jan 2008 06:11:41 -0500") Original-Lines: 16 X-ICS-MailScanner: Found to be clean X-ICS-MailScanner-SpamCheck: not spam, SpamAssassin (score=-1.44, required 5, autolearn=disabled, ALL_TRUSTED -1.44) X-ICS-MailScanner-From: dann@mothra.ics.uci.edu X-detected-kernel: by monty-python.gnu.org: Solaris 9 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:86792 Archived-At: Richard Stallman writes: > Please no K&R in new code. > > We have no policy against K&R style. I recently accepted non-K&R > function definitions in Emacs sources, but I still do not particularly > like it. K&R style is easier to read anyway. It might be easier to read for you personally, but it is harder for people that have never written/read any K&R code. Some emacs contributors have started programming after C was standardized, so they never had a chance to know any different (and its quite possible that some were even born after the standardization). So yes, this preference has a price, and one that is not in emacs' best interest to pay.