From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Juanma Barranquero Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Strange change in bytecmop.el Date: Tue, 26 Jul 2005 12:09:42 +0200 Message-ID: References: <87sly54b2s.fsf-monnier+emacs@gnu.org> <85ek9o40hg.fsf@lola.goethe.zz> <85mzobzlvk.fsf@lola.goethe.zz> <85y87unegt.fsf@lola.goethe.zz> Reply-To: Juanma Barranquero NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1122374745 28948 80.91.229.2 (26 Jul 2005 10:45:45 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 26 Jul 2005 10:45:45 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org, rms@gnu.org, monnier@iro.umontreal.ca Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Jul 26 12:45:43 2005 Return-path: Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1DxMw2-0005Dd-Rs for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 26 Jul 2005 12:45:19 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1DxMyN-0001aC-RB for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 26 Jul 2005 06:47:43 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1DxMnX-0006ut-TR for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 26 Jul 2005 06:36:32 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1DxMnV-0006tk-Ia for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 26 Jul 2005 06:36:31 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1DxMmd-0005q6-8R for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 26 Jul 2005 06:35:35 -0400 Original-Received: from [64.233.182.206] (helo=nproxy.gmail.com) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1DxMYL-00061D-5C for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 26 Jul 2005 06:20:49 -0400 Original-Received: by nproxy.gmail.com with SMTP id i2so179047nfe for ; Tue, 26 Jul 2005 03:09:42 -0700 (PDT) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:reply-to:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=J9BbGtbo4rGgds9q0d7HGnCrM/+JxIkalHOiE8Du0+SVrfc+lf7vmaJCLylUB1bQmFnoNmxK46k6tcCzbbdbnDSmNLZpiGIORJAIwV55mk4rwbGJhe4b+r4rgtJjWeHasqr9lXx4xfWKmg5mWN3FiBTAmDAoso6x3gUFqIx29qg= Original-Received: by 10.48.249.6 with SMTP id w6mr10757nfh; Tue, 26 Jul 2005 03:09:42 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: by 10.48.250.5 with HTTP; Tue, 26 Jul 2005 03:09:42 -0700 (PDT) Original-To: David Kastrup In-Reply-To: <85y87unegt.fsf@lola.goethe.zz> Content-Disposition: inline X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:41222 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:41222 On 7/26/05, David Kastrup wrote: > So, just _when_ would you use it? Me? I wouldn't use it. I don't develop packages with XEmacs as the primary target. I don't ever intend to. > You just said above that making the distinction only makes sense for > packages maintained externally. And so, what? Obviously, if we added the feature 'emacs it *would not* be for us to use, just to help outside developers. That's the exact same reason why some functions we've added are XEmacs-compatible (I just happen to hate the names `define-obsolete-function-alias' and `define-obsolete-variable-alias', which I would make shorter in a blink, but they were added as such because XEmacs already define them, IIRC). > I don't see that. I am afraid of people putting (boundp 'emacs) into > code also for things that Emacs happens to have _now_, even though > XEmacs might gain them in a later synch, or just putting (boundp > 'emacs) habitually in without thinking anything about it. That's no different of using "(fboundp 'feature-such-and-such)" for features Emacs already have. And, worrying about people using things without thinking smells a bit of patronizing, to me. (No insult intended, I can assure you.) > I really think that this is one change that we are better off without. I didn't propose it, so I'm hardly going to enter a fight for it. I just happen to think is not only not as outrageous as you made it sound (when you said "This is so backwards that I consider it repulsive."), but I even think that could be useful. --=20 /L/e/k/t/u