Re: New ELPA package ada-lite

[Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>]

> From: Stephen Leake <stephen_leake@stephe-leake.org>
> Cc: monnier@iro.umontreal.ca,  emacs-devel@gnu.org
> Date: Wed, 17 Aug 2022 18:08:48 -0700
> 
> Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> writes:
> 
> >> From: Stephen Leake <stephen_leake@stephe-leake.org>
> >> Cc: Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca>,  emacs-devel@gnu.org
> >> Date: Wed, 17 Aug 2022 02:56:58 -0700
> >> 
> >> Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> writes:
> >> 
> >> > Would it make sense to have the lite mode in core?
> >> 
> >> I don't think so; that would mean any use of ada-mode would cause a
> >> conflict in auto-mode-alist.
> >
> > Why would they conflict?  Or, IOW, why wouldn't it be possible to make
> > them not conflict, assuming that no one will activate both modes in
> > the same buffer?
> 
> ada-mode does this:
> 
> (add-to-list 'auto-mode-alist '("\\.ad[abs]\\'" . ada-mode))
> 
> 
> ada-lite-mode does this:
> 
> (add-to-list 'auto-mode-alist '("\\.ad[abs]\\'" . ada-lite-mode))
> 
> 
> Whichever is done last ends up first in auto-mode-alist, and is the one
> that (assoc ".ads" auto-mode-alist) returns.

OK, and how is this a problem?  It's quite clear that the last one
will win, but that's not the situation I would like us to support.  I
would like Emacs to have some minimal support for Ada OOTB.  If a user
_also_ downloads and installs the larger package from ELPA, it is
expected that they will only have that larger mode for Ada files.

IOW, I still don't see any problem with that.