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: CC Mode and electric-pair "problem". Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2018 19:46:15 +0300 Message-ID: <83y3fcrqjs.fsf@gnu.org> References: <20180531123747.GA24752@ACM> <20180617201351.GA4580@ACM> <20180618103654.GA9771@ACM> <8336xkt967.fsf@gnu.org> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1529341937 27795 195.159.176.226 (18 Jun 2018 17:12:17 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2018 17:12:17 +0000 (UTC) Cc: acm@muc.de, emacs-devel@gnu.org, tino.calancha@gmail.com, rgm@gnu.org To: =?utf-8?B?Sm/Do28gVMOhdm9yYQ==?= Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Jun 18 19:12:12 2018 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 1fUxhM-00077R-Oy for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 18 Jun 2018 19:12:12 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:36107 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1fUxjT-0000hX-Ui for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 18 Jun 2018 13:14:23 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:52536) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1fUxIL-0005qy-GX for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 18 Jun 2018 12:46:22 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1fUxIK-0007Ex-NP for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 18 Jun 2018 12:46:21 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::e]:42063) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1fUxIG-0007DY-SS; Mon, 18 Jun 2018 12:46:16 -0400 Original-Received: from [176.228.60.248] (port=4728 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1fUxIF-0004Hi-Op; Mon, 18 Jun 2018 12:46:16 -0400 In-reply-to: (message from =?utf-8?B?Sm/Do28gVMOhdm9yYQ==?= on Mon, 18 Jun 2018 16:37:33 +0100) 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:226464 Archived-At: > From: João Távora > Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2018 16:37:33 +0100 > Cc: Alan Mackenzie , Glenn Morris , emacs-devel@gnu.org, > tino.calancha@gmail.com > > Yes, and I'll probably do that. But in my experience, this has a very high probability of burying the problem, i.e. > the incentive for actually fixing the problem is reduced dramatically. But putting the problematic code on a branch reduces the incentive even more, doesn't it? At least with the expected failure, you will see when it unexpectedly starts to succeed; on a branch, the code is easily forgotten forever... Of course, it's better to fix breakage fats, but we all have our lives.