Re: [PATCH] Flymake support for C/C++

[Reuben Thomas <rrt@sc3d.org>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1371 bytes --]

On 24 October 2017 at 11:21, Dmitry Gutov <dgutov@yandex.ru> wrote:

> On 10/24/17 1:07 PM, Reuben Thomas wrote:
>
>> we can't get its copyright assigned to the FSF, so we can't include it as
>> part of Emacs.​
>>
>
> Or, to be more accurate, include it as a part of the distribution.
>
> In the tarball, in the .deb packages builds by GNU/Linux distributions,
> etc.
>
> I was arguing that it shouldn't be necessary to have an Elisp package in
>> the repository.
>>
>
> I'm not sure who you're arguing against.


Currently, we don't have any external Elisp dependencies.​ There's an
assumption that Elisp dependencies must be in the repo and source release.
I'm arguing against that status quo, not anyone in particular.

How would it even be used? Will you write an abstraction over Flycheck and
> Flymake that Emacs would integrate with instead?
>

It could be similar to movemail vs GNU mailutils: if you build against the
latter, you get its mail support out of the box; if you don't, it falls
back to the former.​

I don't think there's a huge need for a common abstraction for Flycheck and
Flymake, as they're largely passive in use: you switch them on and they
work in the background. Certainly, I didn't find I had to migrate a huge
number of settings when I switched from one to the other.

-- 
https://rrt.sc3d.org

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 2682 bytes --]