From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.ciao.gmane.io!not-for-mail From: =?UTF-8?B?Sm/Do28gVMOhdm9yYQ==?= Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Add some aliases for re-related functions Date: Mon, 4 May 2020 11:07:33 +0100 Message-ID: References: <7976B8C1-AFC7-4662-B750-6492EB70C0D5@gmail.com> <20200502192908.GD6832@ACM> <20200502210912.GE6832@ACM> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000095335a05a4cfb315" Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="ciao.gmane.io:159.69.161.202"; logging-data="21185"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: Yuan Fu , Emacs developers To: Alan Mackenzie Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Mon May 04 12:10:29 2020 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 1jVY3R-0005NQ-9P for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Mon, 04 May 2020 12:10:29 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:48500 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jVY3Q-0001wR-AJ for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Mon, 04 May 2020 06:10:28 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:36622) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jVY0m-00052Q-1C for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 04 May 2020 06:07:44 -0400 Original-Received: from mail-il1-x12b.google.com ([2607:f8b0:4864:20::12b]:39898) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jVY0k-0002jZ-Ok for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 04 May 2020 06:07:43 -0400 Original-Received: by mail-il1-x12b.google.com with SMTP id r2so10692606ilo.6 for ; Mon, 04 May 2020 03:07:42 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=Q3n88fETTHwfL8LLynO6/sjrfNJ3kUMnccf2rcek724=; b=RsERECVhDIfHRloCIj/iwabyj/IYO478BV9E4bJOY2CeRbAjz95mNDMPA1zLaNOkFr lLB049eoLFaDMANTCVysTjSI+RVvWo9xq3bisDvwogKr2PLAEeH0BzVJAxPbdCnPIZLS 8vHt/T+bzT7hE3d4dEeSR34E/uSOCVfI4K6bENHFNf65NIXX5+jaTobd2tgFt2e4Ccxw b6HYCqbKB+UptuD7rf2J+RT3gJCNiWpoKejJfbayENz5adFVEIQahYhfKL5fYIEID7xu Va1ICsLFqfXAvoeW8LykrvvbEOH4vthGoULkOmzHfM1FrvjStfG2fVfqE8wU5PnDdUC2 NUjg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=Q3n88fETTHwfL8LLynO6/sjrfNJ3kUMnccf2rcek724=; b=piGOqyta67DrZBgcTTa/MYpFoPau2qfxNDr0eAkfHXsxlwdFv1klFakxIuC1xOJh2P YwIBmuC3s8oyUmz7W0OoEuGfZdo2Fuv1/FTPG3r/OnQFaBKCNKKoYo3oTDXqi7VOHtGv EQ/B5oW0gGyZXf2gUJFI24PjZdGG2uVFWzOdKiTD0N1hqNPq0TOVYvPB8+Fccd5GLfgS WuiMiTNlfxif2zx+7qnG/kDxF937sLb1jSC6iJPo1twTrRvf/reG9rEVYNoOBztUZCvf adXCe20/6PpVZXT+qBT3Ca2KFPCAX+F7gMXXr52wqgtn+OaKysOlvwwp4QQ8227NwV7r Zpow== X-Gm-Message-State: AGi0PubItCe0yp191dUD98q2OCXl9hnO7+hYIIGIUNc7P440nLt0jU3K EGrSCnNor6TlY9okN3ik4aJe6eZwcp74B8g/OGg= X-Google-Smtp-Source: APiQypI27qYtMB/0HFdDmNPVs4TtPhP/eVJZBYVFGTmDL2dXrpVuvGR7OGyUtZjmi317X9j4WhY4aYfzCVtkG42iQ24= X-Received: by 2002:a92:4a11:: with SMTP id m17mr14804794ilf.125.1588586861636; Mon, 04 May 2020 03:07:41 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20200502210912.GE6832@ACM> Received-SPF: pass client-ip=2607:f8b0:4864:20::12b; envelope-from=joaotavora@gmail.com; helo=mail-il1-x12b.google.com X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: No matching host in p0f cache. That's all we know. X-Spam_score_int: -10 X-Spam_score: -1.1 X-Spam_bar: - X-Spam_report: (-1.1 / 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, FROM_EXCESS_BASE64=0.979, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001 autolearn=_AUTOLEARN 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:248802 Archived-At: --00000000000095335a05a4cfb315 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sat, May 2, 2020, 22:14 Alan Mackenzie wrote: > On 1991-07-25, Jim Blandy introduced the alias `search-forward-regexp' > for `re-search-forward'. Why? Lost in the mists of time. Possibly for > the same reasons people are advancing now - make all the search functions > begin with "search-" for supposed easier searching (of their names). In > master we currently have 3534 occurences of re-search-forward and 134 of > search-forward-regexp. Would anybody here argue that Emacs is the better > for these 134 alternatively named function calls? I'd say it was a > mistake, and there is nothing positive to offset the confusion. Or `delete-backward-char' and its alias `backward-delete-char'. We have, > respectively, 5 and 36 uses. To me, this is just confusion, whatever the > original reason was for these aliases. > > I say we shouldn't add to such confusion. > Very good historic points. I hate these aliases, never know which to pick. Every second gained in supposed discoverability is crushingly offset later on by a thousand seconds of second-guessing and doubt over which version to prefer. It's a really bad deal. Shall I try to be modern, or maintain consistency with this program? I have plenty of those doubts with much more important stuff already (iterative/recursive, functional/imperative, etc, etc) I don't need new ones about naming. What a waste of time. Jo=C3=A3o > --00000000000095335a05a4cfb315 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On Sat, May 2, 2020, 22:14 Alan Mackenzie <acm@muc.de> wrote:
On 1991-07-25, Jim Blandy introduced the alias `search-forward-regexp'<= br> for `re-search-forward'.=C2=A0 Why?=C2=A0 Lost in the mists of time.=C2= =A0 Possibly for
the same reasons people are advancing now - make all the search functions begin with "search-" for supposed easier searching (of their name= s).=C2=A0 In
master we currently have 3534 occurences of re-search-forward and 134 of search-forward-regexp.=C2=A0 Would anybody here argue that Emacs is the bet= ter
for these 134 alternatively named function calls?=C2=A0 I'd say it was = a
mistake, and there is nothing positive to offset the confusion.

Or `delete-backward-char' and its alias `backward-delete-char'.=C2= =A0 We have,
respectively, 5 and 36 uses.=C2=A0 To me, this is just confusion, whatever = the
original reason was for these aliases.

I say we shouldn't add to such confusion.
<= div dir=3D"auto">
Very good historic points. I hate these aliases, never know which = to pick. Every second gained in supposed discoverability is crushingly offs= et later on by a thousand seconds of second-guessing and doubt over which v= ersion to prefer. It's a = really bad deal. Shall=C2=A0I= try to be modern, or maintain consistency with this program? I have plenty= of those doubts with much more important stuff already (iterative/recursiv= e, functional/imperative, etc, etc) I don't need new ones about naming.= What a waste of time.=C2=A0

Jo=C3=A3o
--00000000000095335a05a4cfb315--