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: Re: Getting rid of prog-indentation-context Date: Mon, 11 Dec 2017 18:18:47 +0200 Message-ID: <83vahds0ew.fsf@gnu.org> References: <20171129233237.27462.23351@vcs0.savannah.gnu.org> <20171201223529.GG3840@ACM> <4a94ec5c-efdd-50f1-ff4d-277f5f45c2df@yandex.ru> <83lgil1qme.fsf@gnu.org> <83d13x1j2s.fsf@gnu.org> <34abea95-c7f7-e8fa-8407-8c2fd2a4cfe1@yandex.ru> <83y3mkzw1n.fsf@gnu.org> <83mv2zzv7z.fsf@gnu.org> <83o9nexy48.fsf@gnu.org> <83d13uxug5.fsf@gnu.org> <41e3f343-816f-d2db-6575-6ef43d54957f@yandex.ru> <838tecuqjb.fsf@gnu.org> <83609guppd.fsf@gnu.org> <83po7nt6oi.fsf@gnu.org> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1513009216 5031 195.159.176.226 (11 Dec 2017 16:20:16 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 11 Dec 2017 16:20:16 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Stefan Monnier Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Dec 11 17:20:03 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 1eOQoF-0000nc-LJ for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 11 Dec 2017 17:20:03 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:54270 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1eOQoM-0002Eu-Os for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 11 Dec 2017 11:20:10 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:49766) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1eOQnH-0002C6-N5 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 11 Dec 2017 11:19:07 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1eOQnD-0008Tg-Kz for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 11 Dec 2017 11:19:03 -0500 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::e]:41063) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1eOQnD-0008TZ-HX; Mon, 11 Dec 2017 11:18:59 -0500 Original-Received: from [176.228.60.248] (port=3863 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1eOQnC-0007kR-VP; Mon, 11 Dec 2017 11:18:59 -0500 In-reply-to: (message from Stefan Monnier on Mon, 11 Dec 2017 09:18:42 -0500) 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:220886 Archived-At: > From: Stefan Monnier > Date: Mon, 11 Dec 2017 09:18:42 -0500 > > >> Could we just mark them as obsolete in Emacs-26? > > Doesn't sound like a good idea to me: something that was introduced > > recently and barely had any chance to be used doesn't fall under the > > "obsolete" label for me. > > Eli, I fail to understand what you expect prog-indentation-context will > be used for. Stefan, you admitted this stuff into Emacs 2 years ago, so why are you asking me these questions? I'm sure you asked that yourself back then, and I'm sure you had good answers. > Here's what I'd like to see happen for Emacs-26: How is this different from what began this thread quite some time ago? Do we want to start all over again?