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: Compiled files without sources???? Date: Mon, 01 Aug 2011 00:36:40 +0200 Organization: Organization?!? Message-ID: <87hb625b7r.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> References: <87tya82mv5.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> <87ei1bzjwg.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> <4E3133CE.7010101@cs.ucla.edu> <4E31F0B3.3030505@cs.ucla.edu> <87mxfw90oo.fsf@stupidchicken.com> <87r558ms8j.fsf@stupidchicken.com> <87zkjv33w3.fsf@stupidchicken.com> <87sjpn8if0.fsf@ambire.localdomain> <87sjpm7lvt.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> <878vrepc6g.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> <87mxfunx4h.fsf@gnus.org> <877h6yp652.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> <87tya2qg0x.fsf@engster.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1312151827 26513 80.91.229.12 (31 Jul 2011 22:37:07 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 31 Jul 2011 22:37:07 +0000 (UTC) To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Aug 01 00:37:03 2011 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([140.186.70.17]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Qned4-0001Fw-9U for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 01 Aug 2011 00:37:02 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:35829 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Qned3-0007XZ-LB for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 31 Jul 2011 18:37:01 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]:39993) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Qned0-0007XS-Cc for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 31 Jul 2011 18:36:59 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Qnecy-0005FW-Ih for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 31 Jul 2011 18:36:58 -0400 Original-Received: from lo.gmane.org ([80.91.229.12]:60241) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Qnecy-0005FI-6p for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 31 Jul 2011 18:36:56 -0400 Original-Received: from list by lo.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Qnecw-0001E4-Ta for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 01 Aug 2011 00:36:54 +0200 Original-Received: from p508ebd3b.dip.t-dialin.net ([80.142.189.59]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Mon, 01 Aug 2011 00:36:54 +0200 Original-Received: from dak by p508ebd3b.dip.t-dialin.net with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Mon, 01 Aug 2011 00:36:54 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ Original-Lines: 39 Original-X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: p508ebd3b.dip.t-dialin.net X-Face: 2FEFf>]>q>2iw=B6, xrUubRI>pR&Ml9=ao@P@i)L:\urd*t9M~y1^:+Y]'C0~{mAl`oQuAl \!3KEIp?*w`|bL5qr,H)LFO6Q=qx~iH4DN; i"; /yuIsqbLLCh/!U#X[S~(5eZ41to5f%E@'ELIi$t^ Vc\LWP@J5p^rst0+('>Er0=^1{]M9!p?&:\z]|;&=NP3AhB!B_bi^]Pfkw User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.0.50 (gnu/linux) Cancel-Lock: sha1:xR+FKuA6YfjlvhmlEtJ7DRNLx1Y= X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 3) X-Received-From: 80.91.229.12 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 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-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:142611 Archived-At: David Engster writes: > Stephen J. Turnbull writes: >> Lars Ingebrigtsen writes: >> >> > It was a minor boo-boo, and it's been fixed, >> >> It wasn't a "boo-boo", it was a deliberate omission for the >> convenience of the Emacs and CEDET developers who considered >> integration of CEDET functionality more important than the principle >> of software freedom. > > Since you start with the finger pointing: This merge didn't happen > behind closed doors, but was openly discussed on this very list. It was > actually me who suggested the current setup, and it was in this thread: > > http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel/115053 > > The compromise was to let grammar development happen in CEDET > upstream. I did suggest this in good faith; in fact, it would have taken > almost no work at all to commit the plain grammar files to Emacs > trunk. But without Bovine and Wisent, the CEDET parser generators, those > grammar files are practically useless; contrary to what was written on > LWN/Slashdot/wherever, the grammars are not Bison compatible. To do any > actual work with them, you need to get CEDET, and then you will get all > the grammars anyway. Not the corresponding versions to what is included in Emacs. Now Chong stated that he had to hand-edit the resulting grammars to make them fit into what is included in Emacs. That seems like a bad idea with regard to meeting the source obligations and maintainability. So what would be entailed to let upstream CEDET generate compiled grammars directly usable in Emacs? Why don't they work out of the box when the parser runtime is ostensibly what is present in upstream CEDET? Can the differences be factored out into variables? -- David Kastrup