From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Richard Stallman Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Files in wrong subdirs of emacs/lisp? Date: Sat, 24 May 2003 19:18:54 -0400 Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+emacs-devel=quimby.gnus.org@gnu.org Message-ID: References: <20030522090031.9552.JMBARRANQUERO@laley.wke.es> <20030523141856.FEB4.JMBARRANQUERO@laley.wke.es> Reply-To: rms@gnu.org NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1053818521 5882 80.91.224.249 (24 May 2003 23:22:01 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 24 May 2003 23:22:01 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+emacs-devel=quimby.gnus.org@gnu.org Sun May 25 01:21:57 2003 Return-path: Original-Received: from quimby.gnus.org ([80.91.224.244]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 19JiKr-0001Wd-00 for ; Sun, 25 May 2003 01:21:57 +0200 Original-Received: from monty-python.gnu.org ([199.232.76.173]) by quimby.gnus.org with esmtp (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian)) id 19JiXI-00057G-00 for ; Sun, 25 May 2003 01:34:49 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 19JiJa-0004JU-K8 for emacs-devel@quimby.gnus.org; Sat, 24 May 2003 19:20:38 -0400 Original-Received: from list by monty-python.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.20) id 19JiII-0003Sa-8j for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 24 May 2003 19:19:18 -0400 Original-Received: from mail by monty-python.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.20) id 19JiIC-0003H5-W6 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 24 May 2003 19:19:14 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([199.232.76.164]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 19JiI3-00037F-Bo for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 24 May 2003 19:19:03 -0400 Original-Received: from rms by fencepost.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.20) id 19JiHu-0007Wx-DX; Sat, 24 May 2003 19:18:54 -0400 Original-To: Juanma Barranquero In-reply-to: <20030523141856.FEB4.JMBARRANQUERO@laley.wke.es> (message from Juanma Barranquero on Fri, 23 May 2003 14:30:11 +0200) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1b5 Precedence: list List-Id: Emacs development discussions. List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: List-Unsubscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+emacs-devel=quimby.gnus.org@gnu.org Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:14206 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:14206 > The output in question is error messages, not code. These error > messages may indeed be unchanged in 6 years. Yeah, I know is error messages. Still I'd be surprised. I follow the GCC list, and changes to error messages and warnings are often hot topics. It would be useful to find out 1. Whether the job done by that file is still necessary. If the answer to #1 is no, then the file is obsolete. 2. Whether the file still works. If the answer to #2 is no, then the file could use fixing. 3. If the answers are Yes and No, who would like to update the file. Ok. Still, I fail to grasp why you sometimes oppose adding a five-line function as "cruft", and at some other moment support maintaining a module no one is sure it's used anywhere :) A separate file that normally isn't loaded costs very little. Added text in an existing file makes it more complicated. Added text in an existing preloaded file also makes the executable bigger. What about unused.el? Maybe combine it with misc.el.