Re: Lift {global,local}-key-binding to Lisp

["Basil L. Contovounesios" <contovob@tcd.ie>]

Christopher Miles <numbchild@gmail.com> writes:

> Leo Liu <sdl.web@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> On 2021-01-15 14:09 +0200, Dmitry Gutov wrote:
>>> Consider that, when a piece of code is implemented in Lisp, it's
>>> easier for us "mere mortals" to find it, read, understand and debug
>>> it. Even more so when it comes to people outside of emacs-devel.
>>
>> Eli is not against more elisp. In fact he encourages it.
>>
>> His principle is for C code that has been there for decades and is _not_
>> broken let us be cautious and make a clear case before moving it to
>> elisp.
>>
>> There could only be good things following this principle.
>
> If don't move this, then there is same reason to don't more others. Then don't
> change any C code which existed for a long time. So the result is don't touch
> any C code.... A reason like existing for decade time is not a reasonable
> argument. Should talking technically.
>
> An old house existing for decades, should not update it.... because it exists
> decades. We should talk about why update it. And Dmitry Gutov and Stefa gives
> clear reason. But you didn't give technical reason. So I think it's not really
> arguing correctly. Really should stop this.

You seem to have misunderstood - the argument isn't to never touch old C
code; it's to not touch it for superficial changes alone, for some
definition of superficial.  Updating old code for necessary reasons is
always welcome.

-- 
Basil