From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Juri Linkov Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Two problems with directory-local variables Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2018 23:59:12 +0300 Organization: LINKOV.NET Message-ID: <874lejx4ef.fsf@mail.linkov.net> References: <87a7ogzgul.fsf@mbork.pl> <1d2129643cecde529cb9b47e4e015c48@webmail.orcon.net.nz> <87y3c0xh44.fsf@mbork.pl> <87k1njyav9.fsf@mail.linkov.net> <475f19d58094495c2a56d829bb7bbdd5@webmail.orcon.net.nz> <87sh27eizs.fsf@mail.linkov.net> <874leldw44.fsf@mail.linkov.net> NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1537477898 21509 195.159.176.226 (20 Sep 2018 21:11:38 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2018 21:11:38 +0000 (UTC) User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.0.50 (x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) Cc: Stefan Monnier , emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Drew Adams Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu Sep 20 23:11:34 2018 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1g36EY-0005V6-0h for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 20 Sep 2018 23:11:34 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:52842 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1g36Ge-00017Q-DD for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 20 Sep 2018 17:13:44 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:46988) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1g36Fp-00017I-PL for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 20 Sep 2018 17:12:54 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1g36Fn-0002Bu-9l for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 20 Sep 2018 17:12:53 -0400 Original-Received: from pop.dreamhost.com ([64.90.62.162]:56184 helo=pdx1-sub0-mail-a36.g.dreamhost.com) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1g36Fn-00029x-1W for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 20 Sep 2018 17:12:51 -0400 Original-Received: from pdx1-sub0-mail-a36.g.dreamhost.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pdx1-sub0-mail-a36.g.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3EBBD7F2DE; Thu, 20 Sep 2018 14:12:49 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=linkov.net; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; s=linkov.net; bh=VWzybnNc8TzFeYv5PizXLzEJXe4=; b= ip77iV1Ck+gG2siYulqTzVzIxch4jeAeA0/CO7Jl3xbs2NRwlOiZ8jCMHXYPuESm f7nBx1uIPtdWu8ALS5MwiTzUFuzogj23Q+BTF9ZLigRljpE5MaX0IN4PxxFwc6VR TweGd8Gvly76WdCjM9KG9KXwOhCP8HY8+5G0hGyiKBk= Original-Received: from localhost.linkov.net (m91-129-107-237.cust.tele2.ee [91.129.107.237]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: jurta@jurta.org) by pdx1-sub0-mail-a36.g.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 126CA7EDA7; Thu, 20 Sep 2018 14:12:47 -0700 (PDT) X-DH-BACKEND: pdx1-sub0-mail-a36 X-DH-BACKEND: pdx1-sub0-mail-a36 In-Reply-To: (Drew Adams's message of "Wed, 19 Sep 2018 18:42:42 -0700 (PDT)") X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 64.90.62.162 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 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.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:229980 Archived-At: > I don't think there's a good design for this. Whatever some designer's intention > beforehand might be, the result will be misleading in at least some contexts. > > And the problem is that when it's misleading (showing some dots but not > others it can be even more confusing for users than consistently doing either > what we do now - no dots for a list cdr, at all levels - or adding dots at all levels. > > I think (so far, but I might change my mind if I see a good argument) that this > is really something that users of Lisp just have to get used to. It can be a > gotcha - like getting used to quoting (when to quote and when not to). Lisp > has a few such gotchas. > > We could I suppose have `print-dot-levels', like we have `print-level', to give > code control over the level (top-down). That might be a little better than > `print-dotted' (Boolean). But is it really worth it (needed)? I tend not to > think it's worth it to have just a top-level `print-alist', in any case (and the > alist might not be at top level). > > As Stefan said, "only the human coder can know which cons cell should be > printed dotted and which shouldn't." I'd change "cell" to "cells", but > otherwise I pretty much agree. The root cause of the problem is requiring the alist value to be stored in the CDR that prints with confusing dotted syntax especially bad for hand-editing, instead of storing the value in the CAR of the CDR printed with simpler list syntax.