From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: David Kastrup Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Specifiers Date: Fri, 30 May 2008 16:14:42 +0200 Message-ID: <86r6bjlvzh.fsf@lola.quinscape.zz> References: <5CB5F5E5-9239-40A8-A3B2-5F49B94E27B7@gmail.com> <85lk1ui3i0.fsf@lola.goethe.zz> <85od6oe4s3.fsf@lola.goethe.zz> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1212156908 26884 80.91.229.12 (30 May 2008 14:15:08 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 30 May 2008 14:15:08 +0000 (UTC) Cc: david.reitter@gmail.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org, rms@gnu.org, miles@gnu.org To: Stefan Monnier Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri May 30 16:15:40 2008 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1K25OM-0001go-9O for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 30 May 2008 16:15:38 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:36083 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1K25Na-0002PO-In for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 30 May 2008 10:14:50 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1K25NV-0002PG-Tq for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 30 May 2008 10:14:45 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1K25NU-0002Od-Qn for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 30 May 2008 10:14:45 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=56008 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1K25NU-0002OM-Kq for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 30 May 2008 10:14:44 -0400 Original-Received: from mail.quinscape.de ([212.29.44.217]:49764) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1K25NU-0006jW-38 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 30 May 2008 10:14:44 -0400 Original-Received: (qmail-ldap/ctrl 19203 invoked from network); 30 May 2008 14:14:42 -0000 Original-Received: from unknown (HELO lola.quinscape.zz) ([10.0.3.43]) (envelope-sender ) by quinx.quinscape.de (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP for ; 30 May 2008 14:14:41 -0000 Original-Received: by lola.quinscape.zz (Postfix, from userid 1001) id EB2D78F043; Fri, 30 May 2008 16:14:42 +0200 (CEST) In-Reply-To: (Stefan Monnier's message of "Fri, 30 May 2008 10:10:33 -0400") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.0.60 (gnu/linux) X-AntiVirus: checked by AntiVir MailGate (version: 2.1.3-2; AVE: 7.8.0.24; VDF: 7.0.4.117; host: quinx) X-detected-kernel: by monty-python.gnu.org: Linux 2.6 (newer, 3) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:98068 Archived-At: Stefan Monnier writes: >>> Yes, pretty much, except we don't have to worry about combinations of >>> buffer-local with other forms of foo-local at the same time (well, >>> supposedly we have to worry about it for buffer-local + frame-local, >>> but we already know we don't handle that correctly). >> That's supposed to be an advantage? > > What does "That" refer to? > Not having to worry about combinations is an advantage, yes. Knowing that we don't handle something correctly already is an advantage over a scheme that has a chance of offering well-defined behavior? -- David Kastrup