From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Dmitry Gutov Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Emacs contributions, C and Lisp Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2014 21:06:32 +0200 Message-ID: <87y50wfk93.fsf@yandex.ru> References: <87wqgr4v18.fsf@yandex.ru> <53064BD0.7070009@yandex.ru> <87ha7tr5bo.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> <87ppmhecd8.fsf@yandex.ru> <87y50z90pd.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> <87txbn8r6x.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> <8338j717oe.fsf@gnu.org> <87zjlf6tdx.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> <83sir7yue7.fsf@gnu.org> <8761o3dlak.fsf@wanadoo.es> <83bnxuzyl4.fsf@gnu.org> <871tyqes5q.fsf@wanadoo.es> <834n3lzux6.fsf@gnu.org> <87ppm9d3y4.fsf@wanadoo.es> <83ob1ty4qr.fsf@gnu.org> <87ha7lcxki.fsf@wanadoo.es> <83ios0xwcv.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1393528013 30585 80.91.229.3 (27 Feb 2014 19:06:53 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2014 19:06:53 +0000 (UTC) Cc: =?utf-8?Q?=C3=93scar?= Fuentes , emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu Feb 27 20:07:01 2014 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1WJ6IN-0004mE-Bn for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 27 Feb 2014 20:06:59 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:47476 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WJ6IM-0008Bf-T7 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 27 Feb 2014 14:06:58 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:50028) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WJ6ID-00084X-Fg for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 27 Feb 2014 14:06:54 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WJ6I6-0004AD-Nr for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 27 Feb 2014 14:06:49 -0500 Original-Received: from mail-ea0-x230.google.com ([2a00:1450:4013:c01::230]:62651) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WJ6I6-00049y-H0; Thu, 27 Feb 2014 14:06:42 -0500 Original-Received: by mail-ea0-f176.google.com with SMTP id o10so1523782eaj.35 for ; Thu, 27 Feb 2014 11:06:41 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=sender:from:to:cc:subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id :user-agent:mime-version:content-type; bh=xkEZ/ezz7K5UTQlfiTsu9vfVn+sO2kVSHlqeYTVa/3k=; b=Jzjrdht4/hMuLWavgayZUPIkVPidWjjTj8bGr8z0udXL0SI+nd9YbJOamQbZjA3cQr pQVn35RAStYGyUBLPEBIiVx0QeX6p4VapWQffHEfmBg+i0SpWtM1u35+94fgx6mZwD3L Or5XP69cEkkhwQ4CuZ/6PJrfYwGPCAbeDEDrMAGv2T3+Nwbukn/CIcNw07bcwAxxL22v yA20ppyLlyZ0Ksm5x9WAuqjPfqFA83dwQUAdT5kha9H+3gVr8+DPXe1x6lJD5hqL+qPr yeh5bm05g2l3bSzC+iTV1f3R0asEGamSQoyYEkEGZOFRH9mr0tm802Uj8CZ3UxCiF5Cy i2qQ== X-Received: by 10.15.93.202 with SMTP id w50mr11488184eez.87.1393528001642; Thu, 27 Feb 2014 11:06:41 -0800 (PST) Original-Received: from axl (static-nbl2-118.cytanet.com.cy. [212.31.107.118]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id k41sm871949een.19.2014.02.27.11.06.39 for (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Thu, 27 Feb 2014 11:06:40 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <83ios0xwcv.fsf@gnu.org> (Eli Zaretskii's message of "Thu, 27 Feb 2014 20:07:44 +0200") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.3.50 (gnu/linux) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Error: Malformed IPv6 address (bad octet value). X-Received-From: 2a00:1450:4013:c01::230 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:169909 Archived-At: Eli Zaretskii writes: >> > I suggest to try (I did). Maybe then you will be less radical in your >> > judgment of having N+1 candidates when only N are strictly needed. >> >> Adding an overload to just make an specific case work on certain >> completion package is unacceptable, to say it mildly. > > I don't know what exactly you tried, and why did you decide I was > doing unacceptable things, but what I actually tried was clang. After > adding the above line, it only shows one candidate, whereas I think it > should have shown 2. IMO, showing more candidates than strictly > necessary is a lesser evil than showing less than necessary. It shows only 'bar' to me (and another, broken option, which probably means the package I tried - company-clang - doesn't handle the output well enough). I believe it's the correct result, though. 'char' is the more specific overload, so the compiler should choose it. > How many Emacs completion packages that use clang did you try? There's > only one that I could find You certainly haven't tried hard. I personally gave you links to several in this very thread. >> >> A defective refactoring tool can easily cause more work than it saves. >> >> It can introduce subtle bugs, too. >> > >> > "Defective" is a far cry from "non-strict requirements", don't you >> > think? >> >> A tool that fails on some cases is defective > > Then you will surely call Emacs "defective", because most if its > heuristics are not perfect. You both might want to step back from generailzations. The statement about a "defective refactoring tool" is one most developers would agree. A good refactoring tool is one you can apply to a large codebase and then calmly sleep at night without hand-checking every transformation that it did. > Why would we be looking for the less-resistance path? It's not like > clang-using packages are queuing up for inclusion, it actually sounds > like they don't even exist yet. Ahem.