From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Richard Stallman Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: seq.el and the complexity of Emacs Lisp. Date: Tue, 07 Nov 2023 22:08:00 -0500 Message-ID: References: Reply-To: rms@gnu.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=Utf-8 Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="35143"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: paaguti@gmail.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Gerd =?iso-8859-1?Q?M=C3=B6llmann?= Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Wed Nov 08 04:09:00 2023 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 1r0Yw7-0008xf-6p for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Wed, 08 Nov 2023 04:08:59 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1r0YvH-0000tQ-9u; Tue, 07 Nov 2023 22:08:07 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1r0YvB-0000iq-5a for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 07 Nov 2023 22:08:01 -0500 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1r0YvA-00033a-Rb; Tue, 07 Nov 2023 22:08:00 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gnu.org; s=fencepost-gnu-org; h=Date:References:Subject:In-Reply-To:To:From: mime-version; bh=qbSafaW1ktSL/fxzPT9iPSEfz6vmJBjO0Pdiag6I8t8=; b=q1EOiPQu2XNX 3Q+CzqIyEVZU1uxh6H08YxNJ3syF76ZVA3XhGFFB8LiZFMbcLRov5JAoBX7wsVnWdT5ZESmJNekUX W21hyTkoIbNZLceXCiNp5iOtZR9EYqoNVTYi1iAsYNO5j1gKHnXWpYUWwO/oYioXBERiQE0omzdR8 O494wCisWWXJW0ANx/gQ1OX3tLNfo3ohlvW+5mbUjqrcIe3mm6wzSMiFEl2qqQDt+ghfiwkfg8+gR PLPNxXuBLkdRBFM1Ym4DIiui9LniT8LeJPvqem1MmSxiXCRoeq25i85h0c9q4gB8yBhdaqpFXJgRY 8+TUcS+QjvnEebx6h3ozfg==; Original-Received: from rms by fencepost.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1r0YvA-0000F0-JK; Tue, 07 Nov 2023 22:08:00 -0500 In-Reply-To: (message from Gerd =?iso-8859-1?Q?M=C3=B6llmann?= on Mon, 06 Nov 2023 08:16:48 +0100) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:312332 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. ]]] > ...you are loosing me here. I'm still wondering what seq/map are good > for in the first place. Considering something "cleaner" is just a > feeling, isn't it? A feeling I don't share. I don't concretely know, as I have not used them myself. But I suppose that the seq- functions do the same jobs as the cl- sequence functions. > > Could we replace all the cl-lib sequence function calls with seq- > > calls, in core and GNU ELPA code? Seq is simpler and cleaner, so that > > would be an improvement. We could keep cl-lib permanently for > > compatibility for external code, but it would not need to be loaded > > (into Emacs or your brain) very often. > But does that really make sense? Using either is somewhat subjective. It is ok for a decision like this, about which of two alternative solutions is better, to be somewhat subjective. But it is clearly somewhat objective too/ > Saying lets just drop these in a sec to all package authors seems > overreaching. The concept of "overreach" is not applicable to a technical decision like this. This isn't about respecting or not respecting anyone's personal rights. Surely we should not accept a moral principle that Emacs should contain all the alternative solutions that are at least halfway acceptable. We must be able to limit what we include. > You write like lets just remove cl-lib and forget that is existed. > As mentioned elsewhere cl-lib isn't just sequence functions.. That is true. This would affect the CL sequence functions, of which it seems many or all are defined in cl-seq.el. The overall issue concerns the CL functions in general, because of the way they tend to be alternate versions of important facilities defined by Emacs Lisp. Having those sets of alternatives is a kind of bloat. -- Dr Richard Stallman (https://stallman.org) Chief GNUisance of the GNU Project (https://gnu.org) Founder, Free Software Foundation (https://fsf.org) Internet Hall-of-Famer (https://internethalloffame.org)