From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eric Abrahamsen Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Proposed changes to gnus-dup.el Date: Tue, 02 Apr 2019 18:49:11 -0700 Message-ID: <87a7h797u0.fsf@ericabrahamsen.net> References: <8736nbip4l.fsf@tcd.ie> <875zs6rfdx.fsf@tcd.ie> <87pnqehlc0.fsf@ericabrahamsen.net> <87o95yq06r.fsf@tcd.ie> <877ecd9tqq.fsf@tcd.ie> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: blaine.gmane.org; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:195.159.176.226"; logging-data="230913"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@blaine.gmane.org" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.0.50 (gnu/linux) Cc: Lars Ingebrigtsen , emacs-devel@gnu.org To: "Basil L. Contovounesios" Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Apr 03 03:49:57 2019 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1hBV2K-000xyW-If for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 03 Apr 2019 03:49:56 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:45635 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1hBV2J-0001cY-Au for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 02 Apr 2019 21:49:55 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:58905) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1hBV1h-0001cR-3a for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 02 Apr 2019 21:49:17 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1hBV1g-0002lE-3Y for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 02 Apr 2019 21:49:17 -0400 Original-Received: from ericabrahamsen.net ([52.70.2.18]:38054 helo=mail.ericabrahamsen.net) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1hBV1f-0002ix-Fl for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 02 Apr 2019 21:49:16 -0400 Original-Received: from localhost (71-212-49-86.tukw.qwest.net [71.212.49.86]) (Authenticated sender: eric@ericabrahamsen.net) by mail.ericabrahamsen.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 227B7FA17C; Wed, 3 Apr 2019 01:49:12 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=ericabrahamsen.net; s=mail; t=1554256153; bh=3CMSXSJLcAHi3SZqK9qLMhPIk21cojPQS0+bMJHdR0o=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:References:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=T7fj6xmE55FwlFx6/IkpXmZRwpeNkb59d3YO8smW7kfd2fcmMnA0OFcyZ2B1eq43U P61rvI3NRTtILRkVpMXyufq2+Z68RMfoG0uyt5avLOnvmVdKrWos/v7HPfSLy6xsih 63Pq/mb/g7JF9FmZW7Pw7rmt+YRyZaR/gRDyzuOk= In-Reply-To: <877ecd9tqq.fsf@tcd.ie> (Basil L. Contovounesios's message of "Tue, 02 Apr 2019 00:43:41 +0100") X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 52.70.2.18 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:234908 Archived-At: "Basil L. Contovounesios" writes: > "Basil L. Contovounesios" writes: > >> Eric Abrahamsen writes: >> >>> On 03/25/19 18:13 PM, Basil L. Contovounesios wrote: >>>> >>>> I will wait a few more days for people to comment and push the >>>> rest of the patch if there are no serious objections. >>> >>> If I end up backing out the hash-table changes, will this patch still >>> apply correctly? >> >> The original patch I sent will conflict with the hunks where you added >> docstrings to gnus-dup-{list,hashtb} and switched from obarray to >> hash-table operations. >> >> It would be easy for me to resolve these minor conflicts, but if that's >> going to get in your way of more pressing work, then I'll hold off. >> (That's not to say I think you should revert the hash-table changes.) > > Eric, just to be clear: may I push these minor changes, or would you > rather I held off? Oh, sorry -- I'd assumed you'd already pushed them! They're good to go as far as I'm concerned: in for a penny, in for a pound. Thanks, Eric