From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "Stuart D. Herring" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: "Emacs 21" Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2006 15:13:48 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <39197.128.165.123.18.1160518428.squirrel@webmail.lanl.gov> References: <35344.128.165.123.18.1160155315.squirrel@webmail.lanl.gov> Reply-To: herring@lanl.gov NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain;charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1160518460 2025 80.91.229.2 (10 Oct 2006 22:14:20 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2006 22:14:20 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Oct 11 00:14:16 2006 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GXPrV-0006VN-CI for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 11 Oct 2006 00:14:09 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GXPrU-0003no-ED for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 10 Oct 2006 18:14:08 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1GXPrH-0003nR-Da for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 10 Oct 2006 18:13:55 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1GXPrG-0003n2-GY for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 10 Oct 2006 18:13:55 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GXPrG-0003mu-DE for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 10 Oct 2006 18:13:54 -0400 Original-Received: from [192.65.95.54] (helo=mailwasher-b.lanl.gov) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.52) id 1GXPz7-0006cI-3S; Tue, 10 Oct 2006 18:22:01 -0400 Original-Received: from mailrelay2.lanl.gov (mailrelay2.lanl.gov [128.165.4.103]) by mailwasher-b.lanl.gov (8.13.8/8.13.8/(ccn-5)) with ESMTP id k9AMDnqi005646; Tue, 10 Oct 2006 16:13:49 -0600 Original-Received: from webmail1.lanl.gov (webmail1.lanl.gov [128.165.4.106]) by mailrelay2.lanl.gov (8.13.8/8.13.8/(ccn-5)) with ESMTP id k9AMDmsn026692; Tue, 10 Oct 2006 16:13:48 -0600 Original-Received: from webmail1.lanl.gov (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by webmail1.lanl.gov (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with ESMTP id k9AMDmAJ012032; Tue, 10 Oct 2006 16:13:48 -0600 Original-Received: (from apache@localhost) by webmail1.lanl.gov (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11/Submit) id k9AMDmCg012030; Tue, 10 Oct 2006 15:13:48 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: webmail1.lanl.gov: apache set sender to herring@lanl.gov using -f Original-Received: from 128.165.123.18 (SquirrelMail authenticated user 196434) by webmail.lanl.gov with HTTP; Tue, 10 Oct 2006 15:13:48 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: Original-To: "Richard Stallman" User-Agent: SquirrelMail/1.4.6-7.el3.7lanl X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Importance: Normal X-PMX-Version: 4.7.1.128075 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:60594 Archived-At: > Most of the rest are comparisons between 20 (or > 19) and 21 in terms of error reporting, mark handling, echo area > resizing, > and mode line formats. > > I am not sure whether you are talking about passages that describe > differences between specific Emacs versions, or about teaching the > user how to write code that tests the Emacs version. Which? There are both; the passage you quote was talking about describing differences, and the paragraph after it (that you did not quote) was talking about testing the Emacs version. > The former, we should remove. This manual is meant for the current > Emacs version. Discussing older Emacs versions is a digression which > gets in the way of the intended purpose. Are you sure? This is the Lisp introduction, and for version 21 included all these discussions. Certainly 20 is less relevant once 22 is out, and 19 even less so, but do you really mean to remove all of it? (I am not arguing either way on the matter, just describing past practice.) > The latter, we should update (if necessary) so that they handle Emacs > 22 properly. By "properly", do you mean "recognize as distinct from all prior (and perhaps subsequent) Emacs versions, or do you merely mean that they should not produce literally false output (e.g., diagnosing Emacs 22 as 20)? Or do you mean that all such tests should make logical divisions such as "older than Emacs 21" and "not older than Emacs 21", regardless of which divisions they make? Finally, can such tests use `emacs-major-version' and such, introduced in 19.23? > I'm not sure > what to do with the CVS references. > > If they are just intended as example version numbers, any value is > fine. If they are meant to be the version of a recent Emacs, just > update them to 22.1. They are in most cases part of example filenames that sometimes will not exist on users' machines (e.g., lisp/TAGS and lisp/abbrev.el, the latter for an example of `directory-files-and-attributes'). The only mention of the version number outside of a path is as a mention of where the named file came from (that is, the CVS Emacs sources for version foo). So they are neither example version numbers nor versions of recent Emacsen; they are filenames and sources of files. The files don't seem particularly relevant since they are from an old CVS Emacs version, and perhaps all the text that discusses them would be better rewritten to discuss toy (or even imaginary) files. > Can you do these things and send diffs? Please send along clarifications (and more guidance about the CVS names) and I'll do just that. Davis -- This product is sold by volume, not by mass. If it appears too dense or too sparse, it is because mass-energy conversion has occurred during shipping.