From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Adam Porter Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Obsoleting of generalized variable setters in 48aacbf292fbe8d4be7761f83bf87de93497df27 Date: Mon, 21 Nov 2022 16:11:56 -0600 Message-ID: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="6261"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.6.1 Cc: emacs-devel To: Stefan Monnier Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Mon Nov 21 23:13:07 2022 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 1oxF2H-0001Qc-Rr for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Mon, 21 Nov 2022 23:13:06 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1oxF1O-0000gg-L5; Mon, 21 Nov 2022 17:12:10 -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 1oxF1M-0000fM-In for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 21 Nov 2022 17:12:08 -0500 Original-Received: from dog.birch.relay.mailchannels.net ([23.83.209.48]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1oxF1K-0007kn-NQ for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 21 Nov 2022 17:12:08 -0500 X-Sender-Id: dreamhost|x-authsender|adam@alphapapa.net Original-Received: from relay.mailchannels.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by relay.mailchannels.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id BA9E63C10C0; Mon, 21 Nov 2022 22:12:00 +0000 (UTC) Original-Received: from pdx1-sub0-mail-a291.dreamhost.com (unknown [127.0.0.6]) (Authenticated sender: dreamhost) by relay.mailchannels.net (Postfix) with ESMTPA id BB0123C10D9; Mon, 21 Nov 2022 22:11:59 +0000 (UTC) ARC-Seal: i=1; s=arc-2022; d=mailchannels.net; t=1669068719; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; b=hFhXFYyd9CNtsRtvuwuLYN/wotQ3WD1yDAuM3bCoE3M0A1Lm3EkpY4ZjYuGzlFYoZB3USh nYxhtwMgDucEO5DaVTkWAvlxiinwj1XvfURtlOdiZ3GR4jBc/ycNuL4/PR7lZw3GvT3lBy CdvjsNbAbYEt81CAGhIZy3Oe3LDq9FC7whRHFgTMnFhWPuYv3v9YrCVNnCUBc03Fo+3/kz 5HrxxiagyYJtN7zhaev2hCUNS/zNfR2vp8CmGcxPbti2LN0sYzRwFpcMjxn9qpjUR6wqRr tR1QZdbxKtvUBxDd2KLE/BLRddxApk3q9DwR6QDfybZJvLCOykXCMyvkCbJ6EQ== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=mailchannels.net; s=arc-2022; t=1669068719; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references:dkim-signature; bh=2AUFQIdNJFWfBOZ+lmGaMgFi3Fwv4LaLe/K6YVmA0gU=; b=oaACoHzGu/LNBpS5jzXfVoQJ9IqrpldtID6BXxiO8CQK4O1c9i+BGveZVxMPWbqjYkiAOr 9bKtCkdXVRtd+FJYH3LFnjvsBpqeyh6deHzGpS1qdDXeHcyWknrfQLouWNY0QzY0OIQaJR 7Zu7NeLSlswWRp7s3uIgn64V+3guBHuSup6UUn37G/7VKtl1rSIVsgbanoxyD4vVEh6bFC IoW0GE31vw0rN9uJp7Nsu424ZnOlNMo/5xWhcsHZ6QGivmMYDcAOOU93PPWMwam7Ydpsvc TDJKXlaeMECqHfGe4eOXSQoemm6f2LCnGsAbP2/9WzDEdVjWVB6xgWRLZLeYyg== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; rspamd-64c57ffbcf-pjgbp; auth=pass smtp.auth=dreamhost smtp.mailfrom=adam@alphapapa.net X-Sender-Id: dreamhost|x-authsender|adam@alphapapa.net X-MC-Relay: Neutral X-MailChannels-SenderId: dreamhost|x-authsender|adam@alphapapa.net X-MailChannels-Auth-Id: dreamhost X-Plucky-Keen: 076d4ad259a3714a_1669068720276_3016846025 X-MC-Loop-Signature: 1669068720276:3713735103 X-MC-Ingress-Time: 1669068720275 Original-Received: from pdx1-sub0-mail-a291.dreamhost.com (pop.dreamhost.com [64.90.62.162]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) by 100.123.200.83 (trex/6.7.1); Mon, 21 Nov 2022 22:12:00 +0000 Original-Received: from [10.67.0.58] (unknown [216.73.160.186]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: adam@alphapapa.net) by pdx1-sub0-mail-a291.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4NGM7L2XclzPp; Mon, 21 Nov 2022 14:11:58 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=alphapapa.net; s=dreamhost; t=1669068718; bh=2AUFQIdNJFWfBOZ+lmGaMgFi3Fwv4LaLe/K6YVmA0gU=; h=Date:Subject:To:Cc:From:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=Ty3QMJQOgyvGeaoF5afpFwKt1P0STJ/kNQ1Q8zejej0rVR68GIQP68pFWI+gCXPes N46OSiIu0ZbN0GQKMWf+HfIAkoFEUYc0o4E2emMB/Vl04Qsx1F3JV4BEadtUvHe8oX H66XIKy4K6DLNyt2J1DKhXEGvqnkeAkThSCV2PyZsFa0C4zAhfegXWVlhi2WQNhAuk 2xWFxMdyBUp5YtC8nMma2sewQxDfhuw0Df/tRD6sWNLOSOcfUSLc/UYMNKkh/JeOck lkdl0+oHcj7x3vkPIwK7mJt0PuqIbj111luUHEsZZ3hVSm9OuZHDdmYQ6MT9Djm4wS uOBCQDj4Q8bFg== Content-Language: en-US In-Reply-To: Received-SPF: neutral client-ip=23.83.209.48; envelope-from=adam@alphapapa.net; helo=dog.birch.relay.mailchannels.net X-Spam_score_int: -12 X-Spam_score: -1.3 X-Spam_bar: - X-Spam_report: (-1.3 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NEUTRAL=0.779 autolearn=no 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:300314 Archived-At: Hi Stefan, On 11/21/22 15:33, Stefan Monnier wrote: >> At the least, it would seem like a good idea to have an open discussion >> before removing 38 such setters from Elisp. > > They were not removed: they were obsoleted. > When we mark a feature obsolete, it *is* a (last) call for discussion > before we remove it. Ah, I misunderstood: I thought marking something as obsolete meant that the decision has been made, and users should begin removing it from their code. > So go ahead, and argue away to defend those generalized vars you think > we should keep. Make those arguments concrete, tho: those 38 generalized > vars are pretty much all independent from each other, so each one should > be debated on its own merits. I agree that each should be debated on its own merits. But has the burden been reversed? Could we argue why they should be removed rather than why they should be kept? I would generally argue that features that have been implemented should be considered useful (otherwise, why would they have been added?) and not be removed except for specific reasons. And I don't know who has the time to research and argue to undo 38 individual things that I wish hadn't been done all-at-once in the first place. :) Thanks, Adam