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: An anonymous IRC user's opinion Date: Thu, 21 Nov 2024 22:24:56 +0200 Message-ID: <86v7wgnxlz.fsf@gnu.org> References: <86y11xsbil.fsf@gnu.org> <17465b85-430a-4e91-8b12-769b60181ada@gutov.dev> <86ses4sglw.fsf@gnu.org> <86fro4sddd.fsf@gnu.org> <6ac73c67-cb2d-48ef-8f1d-683c5335aba5@gutov.dev> <8634k4s2r2.fsf@gnu.org> <082b0388-b3a1-4523-9f9b-5ead4b110e11@gutov.dev> <86plmrtemx.fsf@gnu.org> <7aa4a684-3374-4d0f-8efc-c4df29337c5e@gutov.dev> <86cyirtahu.fsf@gnu.org> <556779b3-9308-4fd3-9050-bf9c49658cd1@gutov.dev> <864j43t8t9.fsf@gnu.org> <4cc676e8-cac5-4348-99b0-243baf74687e@gutov.dev> <8634jnt5e3.fsf@gnu.org> <4864104c-cb23-4356-ad89-2fea111db66c@gutov.dev> <86ttc2rrh8.fsf@gnu.org> <86cyipsp94.fsf@gnu.org> <9cd17f8b-f88c-49f6-9024-0b6d297e18ac@gutov.dev> <867c8xsmri.fsf@gnu.org> <566ac897-ea5e-4141-bcb3-306d43c9118a@gutov.dev> <865xohrvfa.fsf@gnu.org> <86wmgwnyle.fsf@gnu.org> <178dfc7f-bc2d-4e3b-8417-a616ccc0eef3@gutov.dev> Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="30022"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: johan.myreen@gmail.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Dmitry Gutov Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Thu Nov 21 21:25:47 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 1tEDkJ-0007bd-K8 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Thu, 21 Nov 2024 21:25:47 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1tEDjZ-0001WB-IJ; Thu, 21 Nov 2024 15:25:01 -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 1tEDjX-0001V3-PZ for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 21 Nov 2024 15:24:59 -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 1tEDjX-0005HU-7p; Thu, 21 Nov 2024 15:24:59 -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=ckaTNjUErSPkSDBEK+NdExLrt9JJ6lSuG8oZ0Qe5hJw=; b=YYFV+2s0zGoT drNNV0gzCOQyd9Spr11flRPuu/yt5Sndmif5ev3gvJPIkMYBDePi7XXGwr5b2/5/fHBIn1Phu2ZX6 nnt16OZgskW++faoKbfGendjdn3CIBWTqlrE6DGFB8XS4z48FClvJ2PW6v8iA8+9FZzE5nSHAIIWr 1rZ+/Q17jder5Tk+FEWoyH2xcj8ZZNyAL3n6zAdefU8EjFEQOXEwYEWv+qwe1hhJYwb7iUeM6kT5c mW0w8mud6PvK2n/jhFbzO+3rokoCwBI2ZT0iYWlgsfKRs6Dbsp0DlgROrtSSNn3q30mCdv8HVABP3 hOLWdMy7hRhUVtA6jS43ZA==; In-Reply-To: <178dfc7f-bc2d-4e3b-8417-a616ccc0eef3@gutov.dev> (message from Dmitry Gutov on Thu, 21 Nov 2024 22:11:48 +0200) 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:325561 Archived-At: > Date: Thu, 21 Nov 2024 22:11:48 +0200 > Cc: johan.myreen@gmail.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org > From: Dmitry Gutov > > On 21/11/2024 22:03, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > > >> It would be nice to understand the minimum requirements to replace the > >> current approach. > > > > If you think that I have all of them figured out, you are wrong. > > Coming up with such requirements is not easy, and should probably be a > > team job. I will try, when I have time, to post a list of what I > > think should be part of those requirements, but feel free to beat me > > to it. > > Well, the thing is that I figured the patch already covers roughly the > same area as the current capabilities (while removing certain downsides). I don't understand what you want to say here and how it is relevant to your request to see the minimum requirements. > >>> Then you should understand that I think it _is_ a replacement for the > >>> current setup, which AFAIK we all consider as sub-optimal. > >> > >> Here's a quote one of your previous emails: > >> > >> > This is okay as an opt-in feature, but it cannot be the only way for > >> > users to tell Emacs they prefer one or more TS-based modes. For > >> > starters, some people might be annoyed by these suggestions, and might > >> > prefer more proactive ways of enabling those modes. > >> > >> I have proposed an implementation of a "more proactive way". If it seems > >> insufficient to you, perhaps you could describe missing scenarios that > >> are supported with the the current approach. They might be easy enough > >> to add (or explain how they are supported already through other means). > > > > I already did: IMO we should have user commands to tell Emacs that the > > user wants to use these modes, not only suggestions by Emacs to use > > them, triggered by visiting files. > > "Suggestions by Emacs to use them" is a different feature (implemented > by Philip K. in his branch), it's not what my patch does. I didn't say it did! The "quote from my previous email" was about the suggestions by Emacs proposal, and I wrote that because you asked whether the branch could be the solution for letting users express their will to use TS modes.