From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: [OT] What's wrong with Gnus citations? Date: Mon, 13 Feb 2017 21:48:52 +0200 Message-ID: <83a89p27ob.fsf@gnu.org> References: <87k29d7zvw.fsf@engster.org> <87fuk08i01.fsf@engster.org> <87d1f36xnc.fsf@engster.org> <87a8a4ees0.fsf@engster.org> <87poiz2raf.fsf@engster.org> <83k28v2zj0.fsf@gnu.org> <864lzzoxqg.fsf@stephe-leake.org> <86mvdpopdm.fsf@stephe-leake.org> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1487015337 18220 195.159.176.226 (13 Feb 2017 19:48:57 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 13 Feb 2017 19:48:57 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: John Wiegley Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Feb 13 20:48:52 2017 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1cdMcD-0004Ks-PJ for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 13 Feb 2017 20:48:49 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:59259 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cdMcJ-0000R3-Gj for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 13 Feb 2017 14:48:55 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:42914) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cdMcD-0000Qu-RV for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 13 Feb 2017 14:48:51 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cdMcC-0004JK-Tc for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 13 Feb 2017 14:48:49 -0500 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::e]:35615) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cdMc7-0004Gk-5R; Mon, 13 Feb 2017 14:48:43 -0500 Original-Received: from 84.94.185.246.cable.012.net.il ([84.94.185.246]:1917 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1cdMc5-0003uR-DO; Mon, 13 Feb 2017 14:48:42 -0500 In-reply-to: <86mvdpopdm.fsf@stephe-leake.org> (message from Stephen Leake on Mon, 13 Feb 2017 13:35:33 -0600) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 2001:4830:134:3::e 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:212350 Archived-At: > From: Stephen Leake > Date: Mon, 13 Feb 2017 13:35:33 -0600 > > John Wiegley writes: > > >>>>>> "SL" == Stephen Leake writes: > > > > LS> For the foreseeable future, CEDET belongs in core. John, why does Gnus reverse "SL" as if it were some RTL script? This is not the first time I see this; here's another, even more hilarious, example: > >>>>> "DG" == Dmitry Gutov writes: > > GD> One normally adds an alternative source of truth (i.e. a "cache") to fix a > DG> significant performance problem, when one really can't do so otherwise. > > DG> It seems we agree now that comment-cache's existence can't be justified by > GD> performance considerations. > > DG> Cache invalidation is a known hard problem in CS, so we generally don't > GD> want to have extra caches. Is this some fun feature? If so, someone might find it not very funny.