Re: Renaming eglot -- or at least add an alias?

[Tim Cross <theophilusx@gmail.com>]

Richard Stallman <rms@gnu.org> writes:

> [[[ To any NSA and FBI agents reading my email: please consider    ]]]
> [[[ whether defending the US Constitution against all enemies,     ]]]
> [[[ foreign or domestic, requires you to follow Snowden's example. ]]]
>
> I think the clearest name for Eglot is  Parse Code.
> That's what all these enhancements have in common.
> If you enable the Parse Code feature, various functionalities
> will parse code (when possible, when supported, etc.).
>
> There's no need to eliminate the name Eglot.  I think making Parse
> Code an alias for it would do the really helpful job.  Its source
> files can be mostly unchanged -- but they should explain that the
> package is also called Parse Code, and why.
>
> The main change is that Emacs should refer to the package and its
> functionality primarily as Parse Code in menus and documentation.
> That is how we will get the benefit of that name's clarity.

A terrible name because it is misleading. Eglot does not do any code
parsing. In fact, it knows nothing about the underlying
code/language. As I've said MANY times in this thread, eglot is just a
client which is the glue between Emacs and servers which implement the
language server protocol. It is the servers that have all the language
specific functionality.

GO one step further. Consider a user who is having problems with the
package they know as 'Parse Code". The first thing they will do is enter
something in a search engine to try and find a result. The natural thing
to do would be to include the package name in the search. Imagine all
the 'noise' in the results if you search for 'Parse Code". Your answer
will likely be "Ah, but we have kept the name eglot, so they can use
that in the search!". So now what we have done is potentially create
more confusion as we have a package known by two names and they need to
know the original 'eglot' name in order to easily find relevant
information.

Let it go. You want a better name and none have been forthcoming. This
is a non-issue and time to move on.
.