From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Alan Mackenzie Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: string> missing? Date: Wed, 3 Jun 2015 19:13:22 +0000 Message-ID: <20150603191322.GB18285@acm.fritz.box> References: <87oakxkvqw.fsf@petton.fr> <83zj4grgkc.fsf@gnu.org> <87sia8n8b5.fsf@petton.fr> <87zj4gu821.fsf@gnu.org> <83sia8rdkm.fsf@gnu.org> <83pp5crbfd.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1433358819 18304 80.91.229.3 (3 Jun 2015 19:13:39 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 3 Jun 2015 19:13:39 +0000 (UTC) Cc: tsdh@gnu.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Nick Andryshak Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Jun 03 21:13:31 2015 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@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 1Z0E6D-0004u0-CI for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 03 Jun 2015 21:13:13 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:37333 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Z0E6C-0004Cl-NF for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 03 Jun 2015 15:13:12 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:49276) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Z0E60-0004CV-Qx for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 03 Jun 2015 15:13:01 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Z0E5w-0004Wp-Mq for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 03 Jun 2015 15:13:00 -0400 Original-Received: from colin.muc.de ([193.149.48.1]:62383 helo=mail.muc.de) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Z0E5w-0004WI-Cm for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 03 Jun 2015 15:12:56 -0400 Original-Received: (qmail 57448 invoked by uid 3782); 3 Jun 2015 19:12:54 -0000 Original-Received: from acm.muc.de (p579E9647.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [87.158.150.71]) by colin.muc.de (tmda-ofmipd) with ESMTP; Wed, 03 Jun 2015 21:12:53 +0200 Original-Received: (qmail 18356 invoked by uid 1000); 3 Jun 2015 19:13:22 -0000 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) X-Delivery-Agent: TMDA/1.1.12 (Macallan) X-Primary-Address: acm@muc.de X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: FreeBSD 9.x X-Received-From: 193.149.48.1 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:186996 Archived-At: On Wed, Jun 03, 2015 at 12:50:47PM -0400, Nick Andryshak wrote: > >> > That's just the tip of the iceberg. We have quite a few of other > >> > similar situations in Emacs Lisp. > >> I don't think adding in a few small functions to satisfy some > >> inconsistencies makes the rest of that iceberg very menacing. > > I see no reason to be "consistent" here. There's no requirement to > > have in Emacs all possible inequality functions, just for consistency. > > Now, if there are good reasons to add specifically this function, > > let's hear them. "Consistency" isn't such a reason, because then we'd > > need to add gobs of other functions for similar "consistency" reasons. > What good reasons are there specifically to keep the '>' function? What > does '(> A B)' do that '(< B A)' doesn't? For convenience. `>' is used a LOT. It would be a positive pain to be without it. On the other hand, `string>' would be used very seldomly. So seldomly, that it probably wouldn't be worth the space it would fill up. But if anybody disagrees, he is able to add `string>' to his .emacs, or his own packages. > - Nick -- Alan Mackenzie (Nuremberg, Germany).