From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Stefan Kangas Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: scratch/command 064f146 1/2: Change command to interactive ... modes Date: Tue, 16 Feb 2021 14:30:08 -0600 Message-ID: References: <20210213141225.11309.86562@vcs0.savannah.gnu.org> <87eehid3k2.fsf@gnus.org> <87r1liblzb.fsf@gnus.org> <83y2fq9f0v.fsf@gnu.org> <87k0r8xl7y.fsf@gnus.org> <834kic9g0a.fsf@gnu.org> <8735xwvusc.fsf@gnus.org> <83v9as7xns.fsf@gnu.org> <87pn10ueld.fsf@gnus.org> <83r1lf9apm.fsf@gnu.org> <87a6s3vrnd.fsf@gnus.org> <83o8gj9a8o.fsf@gnu.org> <871rdfvq86.fsf@gnus.org> <83h7mb98g8.fsf@gnu.org> <87o8gjuaez.fsf@gnus.org> <83ft1v97bk.fsf@gnu.org> <877dn7u7wq.fsf@gnus.org> <835z2r94zw.fsf@gnu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="4665"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: dgutov@yandex.ru, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Eli Zaretskii , Lars Ingebrigtsen Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Tue Feb 16 21:31:02 2021 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1lC6zt-00014w-2v for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Tue, 16 Feb 2021 21:31:01 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:33436 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lC6zs-0007yt-5C for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Tue, 16 Feb 2021 15:31:00 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:36922) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lC6z6-0007U9-Ki for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 16 Feb 2021 15:30:12 -0500 Original-Received: from mail-pg1-x52d.google.com ([2607:f8b0:4864:20::52d]:39891) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lC6z4-0005js-Ss; Tue, 16 Feb 2021 15:30:12 -0500 Original-Received: by mail-pg1-x52d.google.com with SMTP id o63so6980814pgo.6; Tue, 16 Feb 2021 12:30:10 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=from:in-reply-to:references:mime-version:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=TYSUpWv1yosFLqB4jzoVOr0EcSZ+oBqDcGVguDaXg14=; b=P1ikNAiTRccNQSYSCcjFj0diLyLqrxlhic/LHPDvHJiAZmQAit8BUR5RsHEe4M3Q8x /9YHVYZWfdkmuWaVoz/npcxyk4thTeTDJdNGsEq1XAKAatE6W+ybGGkjdKa/cy9uXNU7 RROK+y+mVAsMD6HB6e1Z1LOot0+uXVw5i1JGkjENrwr2itVrmN7ZqLnlXZQKK+q4GZDE UpzkCgi7fB5Yw/RoPZnVkJYYcur5qoKeEDUmlfnSedzc/oak6GGaZv34GW9tlVsIZl+I f5Tgs+l2M/+w1XJIjotG2qIhA5OZjQhSioAe/HVjtF8FRdanPgoD2cYvCPIKVdhUt3vy 8ETQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:in-reply-to:references:mime-version:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=TYSUpWv1yosFLqB4jzoVOr0EcSZ+oBqDcGVguDaXg14=; b=H/O0TnQZ8d74S2pG1O1TlrebeR2PEUqcw+to8UfdOPICmyeamrbwGAMk311cfXFaSp 1PK3wiyAu1nwgAum2xdL8/2O418Nu6J7wi11ADvsCVT8bLAvoTDkyZlrJvmdtI4Hu/eu UNO53bRsWcosPmnoUeAMMoGmVxCdnXLJeTQzjLDmM7/6Dt07wlU9jIseLF5vgWayGQZe PlH+eyltDT5ocw7CQVQgMtfyYinO3BNUThZ35rKe+I2XZGdGOKkZWC6b7IWKbb882CCS DjbPbxIkJx6hhk4scwNazyeWhR0Fj2w5o/8CFpyGAaJPhK43R7M6asSjLKkqaHpEAct8 ZHMg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM5314schnl5NlB7kaFrOBoLp6M90PzRK7f96OIEqWm1ribhK5PVS5 wV16Zmi/R+aLToRc6Xz14JkLqWcaQ9PNLCkN2QltSPwH X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyxh/BXShW71j5J6azJ61WwgctFnaWsnO+u+whQkih7MBxuvBumih/kLrrIOvNLpXH24RYdIbDsqkLjx59CzZw= X-Received: by 2002:a62:6382:0:b029:1d2:46ed:d813 with SMTP id x124-20020a6263820000b02901d246edd813mr21127674pfb.44.1613507409004; Tue, 16 Feb 2021 12:30:09 -0800 (PST) Original-Received: from 753933720722 named unknown by gmailapi.google.com with HTTPREST; Tue, 16 Feb 2021 14:30:08 -0600 In-Reply-To: <835z2r94zw.fsf@gnu.org> Received-SPF: pass client-ip=2607:f8b0:4864:20::52d; envelope-from=stefankangas@gmail.com; helo=mail-pg1-x52d.google.com X-Spam_score_int: -20 X-Spam_score: -2.1 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.1 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 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-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:264934 Archived-At: Eli Zaretskii writes: >> > Yes, I disagree that the former is not clear, easy, and maintainable. >> > We've been using similar constructs for years. >> >> That's not quite a response to what I asked: Which one of those syntaxes >> are clearer and easier? (To read and to write.) > > I find both to be of the same level of clarity and easiness of > reading and writing. To my mind, if two forms of writing the same thing are equally clear and easy to understand, the less verbose one is often the better choice. But I would claim that the more verbose form in this case is less clear and harder to understand. It is also more typing, so isn't it obviously therefore also harder to write? I'm not talking mainly about the number of keys pressed, which I think we can agree objectively speaking will be higher, but the amount of new things you need to learn and remember to write even fairly basic Emacs Lisp.