On Sun, Oct 2, 2022 at 12:34 PM Philip Kaludercic <philipk@posteo.net>
wrote:

>  The idea behind the name (Emacs polyGLOT) is not intuitive.


Since when are names "intuitive"?  Do I have any intuition about who
you are or what you do from your name alone?  Names are abstract
indirections by definition (with some 20th century structuralist and
post-structuralist caveats that I really don't think apply here).

I have no problem admitting "Emacs polyglot" is mostly a half-assed pretext
to justify a distinctive, easy to type name. I wouldn't fixate on it.

Some people like its sound and uniqueness.  A demographic you are not part
of, I comprehend that. You can't always please everyone.

> I don't even think it is necessary to rename the implementation as long
> as at least one auto-loaded alias is available.

What is this idea? Say you make M-x philip an auto-loaded alias for M-x
eglot.

Say I go with that, then what?  What about M-x eglot-rename, M-x
eglot-reconnect,
M-x eglot-shutdown and all the eglot- user variables, etc?
They keep the same names? What good is that really?  Alias all of them?
No thanks, there are enough confused users already: I want to communicate
with them as unequivocally as possible

João