From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Renaming non-X x_* procedures in xdisp.c (and elsewhere) Date: Sat, 23 Mar 2019 18:59:19 +0200 Message-ID: <837ecpplw8.fsf@gnu.org> References: <87wokp4okn.fsf@gmail.com> <83ef6xpo6b.fsf@gnu.org> <0f4be9a6-6e09-f55d-9f58-2a15aef264cd@cs.ucla.edu> Injection-Info: blaine.gmane.org; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:195.159.176.226"; logging-data="138915"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@blaine.gmane.org" Cc: agrambot@gmail.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Paul Eggert Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Mar 23 17:59:32 2019 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1h7jzY-000a1e-Jz for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 23 Mar 2019 17:59:32 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:45670 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1h7jzX-0003lZ-Ha for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 23 Mar 2019 12:59:31 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:59070) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1h7jzO-0003jW-D3 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 23 Mar 2019 12:59:23 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]:36177) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1h7jzN-0002hc-IE; Sat, 23 Mar 2019 12:59:21 -0400 Original-Received: from [176.228.60.248] (port=1712 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1h7jzM-0004qx-S7; Sat, 23 Mar 2019 12:59:21 -0400 In-reply-to: <0f4be9a6-6e09-f55d-9f58-2a15aef264cd@cs.ucla.edu> (message from Paul Eggert on Sat, 23 Mar 2019 09:41:42 -0700) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 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" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:234654 Archived-At: > Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org > From: Paul Eggert > Date: Sat, 23 Mar 2019 09:41:42 -0700 > > Renaming would make the code clearer now, and would benefit those unfamiliar > with the code (or at least to this part of the code -- and I put myself in this > category as I'm often confused by the non-X x_* names). However, renaming would > also make software archaeology more difficult. When weighing benefit vs cost, > it partly depends on how forward-looking we want to be. > > I would favor renaming, though I also see the benefits of leaving things alone. I don't have strong opinions about this. Aside of making the archeology and forensics harder, renaming will get in the way of my personal acquaintance with the code in xdisp.c and dispnew.c, but that alone doesn't sound like a reason to object to the change. It will probably also require a lot more ugly #ifdef's in the mainline code (or calling through function pointers, not sure which is worse), and quite a few changes in the headers to go with that. The original long-term plan, to remind us, was not just to rename the functions, but also to extract the common code from them so that we have only one copy of that.