Eli Zaretskii writes: >> From: Christopher Miles >> CC: Dmitry Gutov , Eli Zaretskii , Stefan >> Kangas , "emacs-devel@gnu.org" >> Date: Sun, 17 Jan 2021 14:33:05 +0000 >> >> > There could only be good things following this principle. >> >> If don't move this, then there is same reason to don't more others. Then don't >> change any C code which existed for a long time. So the result is don't touch >> any C code.... A reason like existing for decade time is not a reasonable >> argument. Should talking technically. > > Technical reasons are not the only reasons for our decisions; there > are also project-management reasons and risks-management reasons. > > I also presented several technical reasons, you just ignored them for > some reason. > I see, so can your point out which C code can be changed, which not. Then I have a clear view and guide. Otherwise, some developer have to guess whether this will disobey your principles. >> An old house existing for decades, should not update it.... because it exists >> decades. We should talk about why update it. > > This "old house" is being updated all day, every day. Just look at > the Git logs. Let's not argue straw men, okay? Sorry, I indeed have not read git log too much. I will read them now. I git log list out your commits, found you submitted lot of commits. Almost half of commits are modifying C source code. I misunderstand you, I thought you're some guy who just talking and don't do work. This is my fault and I admit it. Anyway, I still think should port C code to Elisp code as much as possible. Even it's small bettern than nothing. -- [ stardiviner ] I try to make every word tell the meaning that I want to express. Blog: https://stardiviner.github.io/ IRC(freenode): stardiviner, Matrix: stardiviner GPG: F09F650D7D674819892591401B5DF1C95AE89AC3