From: kai.grossjohann@gmx.net (Kai Großjohann)
Subject: Emacs design question (was: run-mode-hooks)
Date: Wed, 16 Jul 2003 14:08:25 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <84wuei7jye.fsf_-_@lucy.is.informatik.uni-duisburg.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: E19cjZQ-00029D-OK@fencepost.gnu.org
Richard Stallman <rms@gnu.org> writes:
> I don't think we should insist that people use any particular
> construct for all major modes. It would be useful to write
> a define-major-mode macro, but we should not decide to make
> all major modes use it now.
This example leads me to a question which is more general:
>From time to time I have found that you are opposed to introducing
(mandatory use of) additional abstraction levels.
In this case, you are suggesting that existing major modes continue
to do things "manually", rather than to use the new abstraction.
>From the past, I remember something similar about define-minor-mode
or define-derived-mode: there was a change to convert a mode to one
of them, and you reversed that change. Obviously, you didn't want
the new abstraction to be used for all old cases.
I think that there is a lesson to be learned, but I fail to grok.
Can you (someone) enlighten me?
PS: Thanks for the lesson "eliminating duplication of code is not
always desirable" that I learned some months ago when working on
Tramp and discussing shell-quote-argument.
Now I understand that developers' time spent on discussion is
also a valuable resource that needs to be preserved. When faced
with the decision to rewrite some small amount of code such that
there will be no problems at all, versus endless discussions of
many developers about a small issue, one should just add the
small piece of code and be done with it.
--
~/.signature
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2003-07-16 12:08 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <E19c0Fd-0004sD-DC@fencepost.gnu.org>
[not found] ` <200307141341.h6EDfxEd006523@rum.cs.yale.edu>
2003-07-16 10:31 ` run-mode-hooks Richard Stallman
2003-07-16 12:08 ` Kai Großjohann [this message]
2003-07-20 23:07 ` Emacs design question (was: run-mode-hooks) Richard Stallman
2003-07-21 14:51 ` define-derived-mode again (was: Emacs design question) Stefan Monnier
2003-07-22 5:06 ` Miles Bader
2003-07-23 7:13 ` Richard Stallman
2003-07-23 7:36 ` Miles Bader
2003-07-23 13:27 ` Stefan Monnier
2003-07-24 2:31 ` Miles Bader
2003-07-25 8:00 ` Richard Stallman
2003-07-24 19:59 ` Richard Stallman
2003-07-24 19:58 ` Richard Stallman
2003-07-22 15:12 ` Richard Stallman
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
List information: https://www.gnu.org/software/emacs/
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=84wuei7jye.fsf_-_@lucy.is.informatik.uni-duisburg.de \
--to=kai.grossjohann@gmx.net \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this public inbox
https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/emacs.git
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).