From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: lsh function documentation Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2024 18:48:07 +0200 Message-ID: <86ttmt1mbc.fsf@gnu.org> References: <86y1c51rtu.fsf@gnu.org> Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="17458"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Ulrich Mueller Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Wed Jan 31 17:48:35 2024 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1rVDlK-0004N5-OF for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Wed, 31 Jan 2024 17:48:34 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1rVDl6-0000wq-LF; Wed, 31 Jan 2024 11:48:20 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1rVDl0-0000u2-DF for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 31 Jan 2024 11:48:14 -0500 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1rVDkx-0005yu-TD; Wed, 31 Jan 2024 11:48:13 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gnu.org; s=fencepost-gnu-org; h=References:Subject:In-Reply-To:To:From:Date: mime-version; bh=Uz+9645BUixJiZIWgGc/zI/u90lcEtoro9BRrrKnOwc=; b=BJmRXeptLDbn wEGYHwL08LyhmaCV4DWHQjOHxB6Ym4Ji+kowLTAqmNHC9ud0dB5MnEVqyYq4AoH+trC+njBlRBTu7 esjIOZjv9NpfSTF0ERpb9GTLUXjI1mf9U4ghu+LbriEm/5+0hkjUEj4ikrfTWhzPQlMuWyN4Wn+xj 5dk5BFxoNT3OdPRVDXfxV/fQxZ1zB/xvhM77eY6LpxmIFyc55DuLl0LxCMfVDjFEnsDZaQ6VQ4gFy qgkuTj6gqNSBA+nqkqOa8wVqa2gCgKZ7zptddwpn2dG+pH6leR3CKkBLauPx+DcPaOak0cML9LjxA CkzPHzTsKOwkK7a+UYC7vA==; In-Reply-To: (message from Ulrich Mueller on Wed, 31 Jan 2024 17:15:24 +0100) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:315675 Archived-At: > From: Ulrich Mueller > Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org > Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2024 17:15:24 +0100 > > >>>>> On Wed, 31 Jan 2024, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > > > We've been there, see bug#56641. > > > I'm not sure I understand the problem you have with the current text > > in the manual and/or the doc string of lsh. > > It's not clear to me what the message "most uses turn out to be > mistakes" tries to communicate. Was it a mistake to use lsh in code > written in the pre-bignum era? Most uses of it, yes. They should have used ash instead. > Also, it's not consistent that the function emits a compiler warning, > but at the same time isn't labelled as deprecated. We don't necessarily want consistency of that kind, not in all cases, anywhere. If you've read the discussion of the above bug, you've seen the reasons for not deprecating it. > If there are still valid uses, then there shouldn't be a warning. If > not, it should be deprecated. The current status doesn't make sense > IMHO. Well, we obviously disagree. And if this still doesn't convince you, then let's agree to disagree.