From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Bastien Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Emacs contributions, C and Lisp Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2014 10:50:30 +0100 Message-ID: <87zjkvhhjt.fsf@bzg.ath.cx> References: <83bnxuzyl4.fsf@gnu.org> <871tyqes5q.fsf@wanadoo.es> <87a9ddg7o8.fsf@engster.org> <87d2i9ee8t.fsf@engster.org> <874n3ke1qn.fsf@engster.org> <87sir336qn.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> <20140301215057.GA19461@thyrsus.com> <87fvn1y0vx.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> <87fvn0senq.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> <8761nusb90.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> <878usht7a5.fsf@zigzag.favinet> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1394617845 5101 80.91.229.3 (12 Mar 2014 09:50:45 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2014 09:50:45 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Thien-Thi Nguyen Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Mar 12 10:50:55 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 1WNfoL-0008NP-TW for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 12 Mar 2014 10:50:54 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:59586 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WNfoL-00071d-FF for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 12 Mar 2014 05:50:53 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:60503) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WNfo9-00071U-He for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 12 Mar 2014 05:50:47 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WNfo3-0006hv-SB for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 12 Mar 2014 05:50:41 -0400 Original-Received: from rs249.mailgun.us ([209.61.151.249]:55151) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WNfo3-0006gu-KY for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 12 Mar 2014 05:50:35 -0400 DKIM-Signature: a=rsa-sha256; v=1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kickhub.com; q=dns/txt; s=mailo; t=1394617834; h=From: To: Cc: Subject: In-Reply-To: References: Date: Message-Id: Mime-Version: Content-Type: Sender; bh=RZ1he/udWlYcGSvFoXMpQ7F7Mh8NAbdLasAZ1X+PVLI=; b=A1mNtxed16AWMdAcWkk/hZj7tDfQzzFXDDoP2Gg18QFYKb148ek6NbgRuUD3sey6Sb10TUvG Mn46JBhFBsusMBKeNURL9w3+oQQ48x0m5OJmB+86ulPFy5VCJKAOQtxZQpAZ45Wvnb6OTGON hpJQYEmgvvBXQira30woqOcj+4U= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=kickhub.com; s=mailo; q=dns; h=From: To: Cc: Subject: In-Reply-To: References: Date: Message-Id: Mime-Version: Content-Type: Sender; b=DApLRc/IOtS68HY7kXe4liGNO3xRdpqs9Hn2qX+jakeZURqFADs/RPU5QtiTs6/rm8yDR6 4RZ+vUEIj8z91/7tBz3lWmao/RPoTATbU97me/rM0lmM7z+LnPXTkKiKfh0HJieavRFf5Mbf 2yoee1+pVnBYtyj6hCtbRXQqbKrC0= Original-Received: from bzg.localdomain (AMontsouris-651-1-244-140.w92-163.abo.wanadoo.fr [92.163.19.140]) by mxa.mailgun.org with ESMTP id 53202de7.7ffbb487cdc0-in3; Wed, 12 Mar 2014 09:50:31 -0000 (UTC) Original-Received: by bzg.localdomain (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 239A51C208E0; Wed, 12 Mar 2014 10:50:30 +0100 (CET) In-Reply-To: <878usht7a5.fsf@zigzag.favinet> (Thien-Thi Nguyen's message of "Tue, 11 Mar 2014 10:26:58 +0100") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.3.50 (gnu/linux) X-Mailgun-Sid: WyIxNjA5MyIsICJlbWFjcy1kZXZlbEBnbnUub3JnIiwgIjE2NDg4Il0= X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 3.x X-Received-From: 209.61.151.249 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:170289 Archived-At: Thien-Thi Nguyen writes: > I think the current > situation w/ GCC reflects a "one-eye victory" (to use a Go analogy), > which basically means that what is defended is not guaranteed to > live. I like this analogy. It also suggests the way to win is to consider both fighting from "inside" (by developing the discussed feature with GCC or Emacs or both), and from "outside" (by making it less obvious for Clang users that Cland is the best choice.) Just 2 lurking-in-this-thread-for-a-minute cents, -- Bastien