From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.ciao.gmane.io!not-for-mail From: tomas@tuxteam.de Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Imports / inclusion of s.el into Emacs Date: Sun, 3 May 2020 10:56:06 +0200 Message-ID: <20200503085606.GC2467@tuxteam.de> References: <83368ivmym.fsf@gnu.org> <5f91c6e5-b4af-4478-b221-4ca37f0fb74c@default> <2afdde98-4d71-4847-8ee4-b0eee677baef@default> <20200503080507.GA2467@tuxteam.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="O3RTKUHj+75w1tg5" Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="ciao.gmane.io:159.69.161.202"; logging-data="39838"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Cc: Emacs developers To: Philippe Vaucher Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Sun May 03 10:57:26 2020 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1jVARB-000AG9-UH for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Sun, 03 May 2020 10:57:25 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:52950 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jVARA-0006bI-Vx for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Sun, 03 May 2020 04:57:25 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:33296) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jVAQ4-0005Qb-NB for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 03 May 2020 04:56:16 -0400 Original-Received: from mail.tuxteam.de ([5.199.139.25]:42215) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:DHE_RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jVAQ2-0003zM-Nz for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 03 May 2020 04:56:16 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=tuxteam.de; s=mail; h=In-Reply-To:Content-Type:MIME-Version:References:Message-ID:Subject:Cc:To:From:Date; bh=40c2HsliT1sJ/UnLkoHn5ezpbH9aipZYAZhEGUZS83g=; b=mCRcpq5BXJX9G7D/6flacqNwSF8hvS2PX7ZAo7r7rLbWl5Pr+MCO6uZmoLdiujaruRQrHeSawXyC1KoR3W9cwB/bbav3LKIMjeFEyuGhFAtvtAOPhTDpRIssmQVktQkP3XL9R9TS7/jnjVxk5lAymE6rIfzu/wzJCPdQDNBLU+B4o/HxlY5XBeIUUXewCP+FqMTu117LT1YIuONX16SjFFFDmdotE40zjO+Hd7rMV4SdEifstmVfVCdA+A+JzQD/cEOPkYcGbk8vTcquMrmqOJUN1UNeVFtRanbwSwTfnWxyav4VI1jZVMiJ3tmYQM+c3ZbdEuhLrvFTwQ/zwMI7Rw==; Original-Received: from tomas by mail.tuxteam.de with local (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1jVAPu-0001xu-FI; Sun, 03 May 2020 10:56:06 +0200 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Received-SPF: pass client-ip=5.199.139.25; envelope-from=tomas@tuxteam.de; helo=mail.tuxteam.de X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: First seen = 2020/05/03 04:05:08 X-ACL-Warn: Detected OS = Linux 3.1-3.10 [fuzzy] X-Spam_score_int: -20 X-Spam_score: -2.1 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.1 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001 autolearn=_AUTOLEARN X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 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-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:248660 Archived-At: --O3RTKUHj+75w1tg5 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sun, May 03, 2020 at 10:24:54AM +0200, Philippe Vaucher wrote: > >> Anyway, you try to focus on the weak points of the arguments. I > understand, > >> it's a natural defense mechanism. >=20 > > Here it is again. >=20 > > Psychologizing your opponent is dangerous, may be insulting and won't > > bring the quest forward. >=20 > Oops, seems I derailed again. Thanks for pointing these out, it helps me > notice. I'm in the nice position of a somewhat external observer. Having been involved in that kind of discussions in far more unconfortable positions in the past, I'm just trying to offer what I can. Of course, I may be wrong and all that -- in that case I'd hope someone sets me straight (on-list or off-list). I can take quite some abuse whenever I can assume it's well-intentioned :-) > I have problems when someone looks to me like putting a lot of efforts in= to > not seeing where we are talking from, and only pointing things from > their perspective (all this while, I think, we try to understand theirs). Often, such is the feeling on all sides... > But I do realise now that it's just myself who has an understanding > problem: if I truly understood the other person I'd not be surprised. What > would work wonders for me is to say something like "I understand your > position and why you think it's better but for me it's useless because...= ". Of course that's not only you. It's always easier to see the other's understanding problem. One's own can only be inferred (by making the reasonable assumption that the other is, on the average, as smart as oneself), but that is an abstract thing. > It looks like most of our missunderstandings come from the fact that I > expect others to be familiar with a lot of concepts or how a significant > portion of the developers in the world work & function. Based on previous > messages I discovered that's not the case at all, and it looks like this > community is sometimes a bit "unaware" of how things work for a lot of > people "outside". That's why I try to compare it with cultures. Basically, I'm convinced that the same mechanisms are at work. Cultures gather around languages, but in a very subtle and complex way. The official translation into English of "pav=C3=A9 de b=C5=93uf" is j= ust "beef steak". But the association cloud stirred up in the mind of a person rooted in French culture (think Bourgongne :) will be totally different to the cloud stirred up in someone, say, accultured in Berlin. When writing (and even more when reading) code, similar mechanisms are at work. A wise person (I think it was Donald Knuth) once said that he writes programs not to convince the machine to do something, but to convince his colleagues that the program is doing the right thing. So computer languages are (a strange kind) of human languages. Now assume Alan is proofreading a patch coming from somewhere else. Would you like him to read it as he reads his native language, or as he reads a foreign language, dictionary in hand? I guess the first choice will contribute towards a higher quality in Emacs! OTOH cultures and languages are living organisms. It doesn't make sense to pretend they're static (unless they are dead). Cheers -- t --O3RTKUHj+75w1tg5 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: Digital signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAl6uhyYACgkQBcgs9XrR2ka0ogCbBxDol0m3xYygURuWEOVylGvR MGcAnirr0Q9/XC0dtxJgck5D+Y79mn4M =IX2H -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --O3RTKUHj+75w1tg5--