From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.ciao.gmane.io!not-for-mail From: Richard Stallman Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: emacs rendering comparisson between emacs23 and emacs26.3 Date: Thu, 02 Apr 2020 22:54:19 -0400 Message-ID: References: <86tv2h2vww.fsf@gmail.com> <20200322123818.GB32470@ACM> <87eetk5swm.fsf@gnu.org> <20200326193128.GC14092@ACM> <86d08y4zsx.fsf@gmail.com> <83sghs7qdz.fsf@gnu.org> <83h7y63sjj.fsf@gnu.org> <834ku43c61.fsf@gnu.org> <83k12zz6ds.fsf@gnu.org> <83zhbuxbf3.fsf@gnu.org> Reply-To: rms@gnu.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=Utf-8 Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="ciao.gmane.io:159.69.161.202"; logging-data="91284"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: acm@muc.de, rrandresf@gmail.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Fri Apr 03 04:54:51 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 1jKCTq-000Nbj-Qw for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Fri, 03 Apr 2020 04:54:50 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:49554 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jKCTp-0004Lu-QP for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Thu, 02 Apr 2020 22:54:49 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:38471) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jKCTM-0003vP-Ov for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 02 Apr 2020 22:54:21 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]:45163) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1jKCTM-0007dR-KL; Thu, 02 Apr 2020 22:54:20 -0400 Original-Received: from rms by fencepost.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1jKCTL-0002JZ-CL; Thu, 02 Apr 2020 22:54:19 -0400 In-Reply-To: <83zhbuxbf3.fsf@gnu.org> (message from Eli Zaretskii on Thu, 02 Apr 2020 16:30:24 +0300) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] 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:246301 Archived-At: [[[ To any NSA and FBI agents reading my email: please consider ]]] [[[ whether defending the US Constitution against all enemies, ]]] [[[ foreign or domestic, requires you to follow Snowden's example. ]]] > > I'm not suggesting we try to _predict_ the effect on code speed, > > rather than we have a guideline to identify the cases where _if_ > > the code gets slower it would be hard for a user to escape that. > > > > What we would do, in those cases, is add a switch to turn off > > the changes. > Without some efficient method of identifying the cases where this is > probable, I fear we will have to add such switches for almost every > non-trivial change (and for some trivial ones as well). I am not suggesting that we band over backwards. But it would be useful to err on the side of letting people turn these features off. We don't have to preserve those switches forever. After the feature is included in a release for several months, we can ask the users, "Who finds it useful to disable the XYZ feature?" If nobody reports a real need for that switch, we can delete it. -- Dr Richard Stallman Chief GNUisance of the GNU Project (https://gnu.org) Founder, Free Software Foundation (https://fsf.org) Internet Hall-of-Famer (https://internethalloffame.org)