From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Instead of pcase Date: Sun, 19 Nov 2023 20:30:18 +0200 Message-ID: <83edglk345.fsf@gnu.org> References: <87fs15kkk1.fsf@yahoo.com> <874jhi3qx3.fsf@web.de> <83y1etkiuq.fsf@gnu.org> <6f376b44-0d57-0398-b494-a4cfdfa6d38c@gutov.dev> <83o7fpkd7g.fsf@gnu.org> <83leatkc6b.fsf@gnu.org> Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="35229"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: michael_heerdegen@web.de, luangruo@yahoo.com, jporterbugs@gmail.com, rms@gnu.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Dmitry Gutov Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Sun Nov 19 19:31:32 2023 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 1r4mZu-00090X-SU for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Sun, 19 Nov 2023 19:31:30 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1r4mZJ-00047v-3M; Sun, 19 Nov 2023 13:30:53 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1r4mZE-00047i-Oa for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 19 Nov 2023 13:30:49 -0500 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1r4mZD-0004oZ-PW; Sun, 19 Nov 2023 13:30:47 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gnu.org; s=fencepost-gnu-org; h=References:Subject:In-Reply-To:To:From:Date: mime-version; bh=Z8gkt665ScSpr2xnGWgGnDs541iMTReuNjpsjOlou8E=; b=cBR/pNyrzSdV I2IW/p5ElX3Mo8LTXR7on4eQ7/xaR9GKSQ2VjAxP9RMUmhAtUPk0yt1q4kSIjSOAOHupD/2txLQuC 30I+4MTP0vAyI1P9zofWUwTZ53k0LFhzNfFNxpXg8uc4c0tM1klWnl8DZ81nO0FF+/LkO7/rg3dA3 CgLHkSgFYBfq8XAXCHrYroNH32FNJ3aG39d719KT7PqKfTT9VWOFIp2GFJgoY6R0rQpRt0AxZ+FLH Y6AZ8C84p9xFbIl/OfBBhzTKhBB+Cz3cqXwu8Hbpmcxsrw4u0c6uXvSqSDMYeIEJVoRNR5taZ39ui DpwtOkVmGn9cE+OisOL1UA==; In-Reply-To: (message from Dmitry Gutov on Sun, 19 Nov 2023 20:04:56 +0200) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:313010 Archived-At: > Date: Sun, 19 Nov 2023 20:04:56 +0200 > Cc: michael_heerdegen@web.de, luangruo@yahoo.com, jporterbugs@gmail.com, > rms@gnu.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org > From: Dmitry Gutov > > >> I don't see calls for prohibiting those implementation styles, in the > >> previous messages, or anywhere. It would be impractical anyway. > > > > I wasn't talking about prohibiting, I was talking about accepting that > > both sides have a right to describe their experiences. > > Perhaps you'll consider posting a message supporting both positions, then. I don't understand what you mean by "supporting both positions". How is it possible for a person to support two opposite positions? > >>>> OTOH, enacting a ban on particular abstractions will just about > >>>> guarantee that certain kinds of features will not be implemented. > >>> That's a strawman: no one of those who set policies here suggested any > >>> bans. One should be able to post opinions for and against certain > >>> coding styles without being accuse in mortal sins. > >> > >> No one is arguing about whether people are allowed to post opinions. > >> > >> There have been a few calls for working toward dropping pcase or cl-lib > >> from the Emacs core, however. > > > > You need to know to whom you listen, before you make such far-reaching > > conclusions. > > I don't think I've made any specific conclusion (or any predictions). So your reference to "enacting a ban" is not a conclusion? Then why are you condemning something about which you still didn't reach any specific conclusions? > But when some prolific contributors make such statements, and RMS is > noticeably on their side, that can't help but create a certain > impression to the public (this list is read not just by the core > contributors). That impression is unjustified, and acting on it raises the level of unnecessary flames, and is not otherwise useful in any way.