From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Miles Bader Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: patch to emacsbug.el proposed.. Date: 04 Sep 2002 10:44:45 +0900 Sender: emacs-devel-admin@gnu.org Message-ID: References: <87hehaol77.fsf@computer.localdomain> <87wuq5uu33.fsf@computer.localdomain> Reply-To: Miles Bader NNTP-Posting-Host: localhost.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1031103883 15319 127.0.0.1 (4 Sep 2002 01:44:43 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 4 Sep 2002 01:44:43 +0000 (UTC) Cc: deego@glue.umd.edu, emacs-devel@gnu.org Return-path: Original-Received: from quimby.gnus.org ([80.91.224.244]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 17mPDl-0003yx-00 for ; Wed, 04 Sep 2002 03:44:41 +0200 Original-Received: from monty-python.gnu.org ([199.232.76.173]) by quimby.gnus.org with esmtp (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian)) id 17mPmj-00086V-00 for ; Wed, 04 Sep 2002 04:20:50 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.10) id 17mPFK-0004bj-00; Tue, 03 Sep 2002 21:46:18 -0400 Original-Received: from list by monty-python.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.10) id 17mPDz-0004af-00 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 03 Sep 2002 21:44:55 -0400 Original-Received: from mail by monty-python.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.10) id 17mPDx-0004aG-00 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 03 Sep 2002 21:44:55 -0400 Original-Received: from tyo201.gate.nec.co.jp ([202.32.8.214]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.10) id 17mPDw-0004a9-00; Tue, 03 Sep 2002 21:44:53 -0400 Original-Received: from mailgate4.nec.co.jp ([10.7.69.195]) by TYO201.gate.nec.co.jp (8.11.6/3.7W01080315) with ESMTP id g841inE20373; Wed, 4 Sep 2002 10:44:49 +0900 (JST) Original-Received: from mailsv.nec.co.jp (mailgate51.nec.co.jp [10.7.69.190]) by mailgate4.nec.co.jp (8.11.6/3.7W-MAILGATE-NEC) with ESMTP id g841img18831; Wed, 4 Sep 2002 10:44:48 +0900 (JST) Original-Received: from mcsss2.ucom.lsi.nec.co.jp ([10.30.114.133]) by mailsv.nec.co.jp (8.11.6/3.7W-MAILSV-NEC) with ESMTP id g841ike19262; Wed, 4 Sep 2002 10:44:47 +0900 (JST) Original-Received: from mcspd15.ucom.lsi.nec.co.jp (mcspd15 [10.30.114.174]) by mcsss2.ucom.lsi.nec.co.jp (8.10.2+Sun/3.7Wlsi_mx_6.0) with ESMTP id g841iks24049; Wed, 4 Sep 2002 10:44:46 +0900 (JST) Original-Received: by mcspd15.ucom.lsi.nec.co.jp (Postfix, from userid 31295) id 8106236F4; Wed, 4 Sep 2002 10:44:45 +0900 (JST) Original-To: rms@gnu.org System-Type: i686-pc-linux-gnu Blat: Foop In-Reply-To: Original-Lines: 13 Errors-To: emacs-devel-admin@gnu.org X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.11 Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: Emacs development discussions. List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:7421 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:7421 Richard Stallman writes: > The question is whether it is worth even the added complexity. > I think not, not for just interactive use. I don't think just moving some inline code into separate function really deserves the term `complexity'; it probably even makes the code more clear. Even if only one person ever uses the new function by itself, why not do it? -Miles -- P.S. All information contained in the above letter is false, for reasons of military security.