From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Alan Mackenzie Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Distinguishing `consp` and `functionp` Date: Sun, 28 Jan 2024 19:42:28 +0000 Message-ID: References: <86y1c94aed.fsf@gnu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="31128"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: monnier@iro.umontreal.ca, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Sun Jan 28 20:43:31 2024 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 1rUB3y-0007vl-Cz for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Sun, 28 Jan 2024 20:43:30 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1rUB37-0000S3-K3; Sun, 28 Jan 2024 14:42:38 -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 1rUB33-0000RB-VJ for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 28 Jan 2024 14:42:33 -0500 Original-Received: from mail.muc.de ([193.149.48.3]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1rUB31-0003ru-RL for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 28 Jan 2024 14:42:33 -0500 Original-Received: (qmail 55718 invoked by uid 3782); 28 Jan 2024 20:42:29 +0100 Original-Received: from acm.muc.de (pd953ae19.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [217.83.174.25]) (using STARTTLS) by colin.muc.de (tmda-ofmipd) with ESMTP; Sun, 28 Jan 2024 20:42:28 +0100 Original-Received: (qmail 12996 invoked by uid 1000); 28 Jan 2024 19:42:28 -0000 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <86y1c94aed.fsf@gnu.org> X-Submission-Agent: TMDA/1.3.x (Ph3nix) X-Primary-Address: acm@muc.de Received-SPF: pass client-ip=193.149.48.3; envelope-from=acm@muc.de; helo=mail.muc.de X-Spam_score_int: -18 X-Spam_score: -1.9 X-Spam_bar: - X-Spam_report: (-1.9 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action 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:315568 Archived-At: Hello, Eli. On Sun, Jan 28, 2024 at 19:48:10 +0200, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > > Date: Sun, 28 Jan 2024 17:26:03 +0000 > > Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org > > From: Alan Mackenzie > > Hello, Stefan. > > On Sat, Jan 27, 2024 at 19:00:49 -0500, Stefan Monnier wrote: > > > > Evasive non-answer number 1. > > > That statement is mildly offensive. > > But justified. > It isn't, not here. Please stop. Bonus points for apologizing. I apologise to you and the rest of the group (excluding SM) for being so blunt. > > You did not answer the points I made and the questions I > > put. You gave completely unsatisfactory "answers" which didn't offer > > any information. You answered like a politician, swerving awkward > > points, and derailing the discussion onto topics the questions weren't > > concerned with. > All of this can be expressed politely, and given that English is your > first language, you should have no problem coming up with a more > polite wording. So please do. I've been coming up with "polite wording" with Stefan for over 20 years now, when he's dodged answering questions. It's never done any good. What would you suggest I do in such situations? I'm worried about his proposal for fundamental changes in the Lisp machine. I've asked him what the benefit of the proposed change will be 5 or 6 times, mostly politely, and got no meaningful answer any of those times. I suspect that there are no advantages to this proposal, only disadvantages. But I'm worried that I'll wake up some day to find it installed on master anyway. You've also expressed concern, albeit much more gently. Perhaps you could find a way of putting the question to Stefan in a way which he would actually answer. Thanks! -- Alan Mackenzie (Nuremberg, Germany).