Re: Emacs 25.0.04: Feature Request: Make called-interactively-p's argument optional

[Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>]

> From: Andreas Röhler <andreas.roehler@online.de>
> Date: Sun, 3 Jul 2016 20:36:56 +0200
> 
> On 30.06.2016 17:30, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> >> From: Robert Weiner <rsw@gnu.org>
> >> Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2016 10:25:26 -0400
> >> Cc: Richard Stallman <rms@gnu.org>, emacs-devel <emacs-devel@gnu.org>
> >>
> >> It would be nice if John and Eli could just make some final decision
> >> on the interactive-p issue and then put that one to rest, whatever it
> >> is.
> > I have no opinion on the subject, except the general principle that we
> > shouldn't back up on past decisions unless they are truly disastrous,
> 
> They are.

Once again, please back up your assertions with some clear-cut
evidence.  A disastrous decision should not be hard to show as such:
just come up with a couple of examples where this decision causes a
disaster.  This:

> This is another example from a couple of issues which went 
> wrong last years.
> Code was made swollen up and complicated, simple solutions rejected.
> 
> BTW a characteristic design-flaw beyond mentioned last days is around 
> use-region-p.
> With use-empty-active-region or region-active-p it hardly comes to an end.

doesn't even come close.