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: scratch/command 064f146 1/2: Change command to interactive ... modes Date: Tue, 16 Feb 2021 19:03:19 +0200 Message-ID: <83v9as7xns.fsf@gnu.org> References: <20210213141225.11309.86562@vcs0.savannah.gnu.org> <20210213141226.EEDFE20999@vcs0.savannah.gnu.org> <47209379-76df-4c97-e5ff-b3b04da0db1d@yandex.ru> <87zh07of0e.fsf@gnus.org> <0605ed62-a785-d190-caf2-2232e1db3b0f@yandex.ru> <87mtw6d480.fsf@gnus.org> <87eehid3k2.fsf@gnus.org> <87r1liblzb.fsf@gnus.org> <83y2fq9f0v.fsf@gnu.org> <87k0r8xl7y.fsf@gnus.org> <834kic9g0a.fsf@gnu.org> <8735xwvusc.fsf@gnus.org> Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="35009"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: dgutov@yandex.ru, stefankangas@gmail.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Lars Ingebrigtsen Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Tue Feb 16 18:14:07 2021 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 1lC3vK-0008z0-HW for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Tue, 16 Feb 2021 18:14:06 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:35144 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lC3vJ-00061x-JH for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Tue, 16 Feb 2021 12:14:05 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:34268) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lC3ko-0000b6-1D for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 16 Feb 2021 12:03:14 -0500 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]:55534) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lC3kn-0001rm-MI; Tue, 16 Feb 2021 12:03:13 -0500 Original-Received: from 84.94.185.95.cable.012.net.il ([84.94.185.95]:3871 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1lC3kl-00089a-7Z; Tue, 16 Feb 2021 12:03:11 -0500 In-Reply-To: <8735xwvusc.fsf@gnus.org> (message from Lars Ingebrigtsen on Tue, 16 Feb 2021 17:31:31 +0100) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 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" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:264896 Archived-At: > From: Lars Ingebrigtsen > Cc: stefankangas@gmail.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org, dgutov@yandex.ru > Date: Tue, 16 Feb 2021 17:31:31 +0100 > > > To me, the proposed alternatives sound like a clear win, since the > > downsides are non-existent, whereas the advantage is clear. Why do we > > need to insist on introducing bytecode incompatibility? > > Nobody responded to my dismissals, so I have no idea what parts (if any) > of those people thought were insufficient. I thought they did, but maybe I've mixed up the chronology here, as mail delivery was behaving strangely during the last few days. > Could you explain, perhaps? What part would you like me to explain?