Re: [External] : Re: Deleting functions and variables obsolete since 24.1--24.3

[Po Lu <luangruo@yahoo.com>]

Drew Adams <drew.adams@oracle.com> writes:

> I *STRONGLY* object to removing any of the
> `special-display' user options and their support.
> They should never have been deprecated.  I don't
> want to see them ever be abandoned.
>
> It's fine for any user to (try to) use
> `display-buffer-alist' to accomplish, in a
> complicated way, what `special-display' does simply.
>
> It's wrong to get rid of `special-display'.  I use
> it all day, every day, and my code uses it.
>
> IF you create `display-buffer' user options that
> unequivocally reproduce what `special-display' does
> so simply, THEN we can talk about getting rid of
> `special-display'.
>
> That's never been done - in spite of the cavalier
> punt statement to just "use `display-buffer-alist'
> instead", added by the deprecation to each of the
> `special-display' doc strings.
>
> If you can't do it, how do you expect users to?
>
> `special-display' does everything I need that it
> says it does, and it does it simply.
>
> `special-display' makes no claim or pretense to do
> what `display-buffer-alist' does.  And the latter
> doesn't provide what the former provides.  (Can
> you make it provide that feature?)
>
> Leave it alone.  Adding `display-buffer-alist' was
> a _good_ thing - thank you Martin.  Deprecating,
> let alone removing, `special-display' would be an
> atrocity.
>
> Removing `special-display' does _not_ "need doing".
> Take a break - do something constructive instead.

Seconded.  I completely agree here.