From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Ergus Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.help Subject: Re: Is Elisp really that slow? Date: Wed, 15 May 2019 22:46:29 +0200 Message-ID: <20190515204629.pw5la42bskizi3hs@Ergus> References: <20190514235412.kncazq45szlum2gr@Ergus> <46f308ff-5a70-8ccc-310b-48167088ff5a@yandex.ru> <87woirsvdb.fsf@telefonica.net> <87sgtfsswd.fsf@telefonica.net> <76f6370c-e8b7-bc59-634c-c48ea7af7f70@yandex.ru> <87lfz7sqb9.fsf@telefonica.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Info: blaine.gmane.org; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:195.159.176.226"; logging-data="144364"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@blaine.gmane.org" User-Agent: NeoMutt/20180716 Cc: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org To: =?utf-8?B?w5NzY2Fy?= Fuentes Original-X-From: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed May 15 22:48:50 2019 Return-path: Envelope-to: geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1hR0pW-000bS1-79 for geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Wed, 15 May 2019 22:48:50 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:42277 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1hR0pV-0004jm-6G for geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Wed, 15 May 2019 16:48:49 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:50597) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1hR0nR-0003Zg-Jk for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 15 May 2019 16:46:42 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1hR0nQ-0006Bo-EP for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 15 May 2019 16:46:41 -0400 Original-Received: from sonic310-11.consmr.mail.ir2.yahoo.com ([77.238.177.32]:41877) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1hR0nQ-00068t-6S for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 15 May 2019 16:46:40 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=aol.com; s=a2048; t=1557953197; bh=oR4vXIyqKRhEHfA8h7ZRHvgIot6gaRnTJ6hM0c9Eo2Y=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From:Subject; b=NVm/wUaMr8eR8UJfsLvkVI2kftbvEtLr5udJZ5Y3rfSpMnC/oxMyBqA92WCWe9mLjSsTwPcN+WmEfAFT2l2AqjZ8jIsLFxUwLqKXAgBVuAukA/JFJi622PyQx6p5QBqECghfOdypD+J9yJRWn7FisqjQg3l9nfKM/LnzJEQc6Xjnjbs+bORwI+dwz7MvvKHGiak1ynjRmCREa0bltU5iEdNGSpWriA99JpUrcwAJuxPu01JCLlNf3x3COELMjUOyzV52BbCIW2XCq2F6lwzxx6RK3zdZtvxqENLSy8jNNLVZf+xOainvpJNZhQhenuzw9q1KflWNHv1S2kRMY/+HPA== X-YMail-OSG: MqoH62oVM1m4uYJaHGrNfNKy4qoCkUJ6nI1ATu0bm5iaDeDIx3.KuGgY0UCkapN UnfDteY0l5QMRqN2ORLGh7Mia3f4zKXU_7dXy7kAQdTTAB99zqIg.zXBKuwt8F9HnxLTbBXLu5KT 9ZOOB5xVh_bg6z7vhhPWg8ozTNwIHG_lO6ualXbrHMWcjpx3x3fHDszYggBR5aUMriKpERUd5HaY vBd8zCbQHg9W9Ce6vkdWEHzZ0BS3ZQ.kmVzgn_Erkse4tmRQPNgEzPQ5iizmE4XfDiLaFWMluIFH Tj5nfmTHwWXbiHiBlaA4d.NfWddrhIANr3didk8AVlkYWJhqn0IzmxliyWnzq2OCfrOo7MIM42xl 348EgFTTDaotUGkcHPI5hQroeLBfyVEHObtABhOXIm15I1OzFUwv9RMI8m3OT8Awp1FmHhL51MtX Wnk1G0QdEzes8wG8GejTTUW77KNfko4eiBAa6dfR7ttZ7gD93a30aqe8JaoJYCQPcxIBYJJ0mytY nbLxJt_uROTT3MKt3uSyfcZnsJNKxpGUxPr2t1Ks7F5QwLFAXI797mo1fD6xA1h_.wPsQcxwcwx_ l25lAWytltYa7sgZjAM7r2E8I7P__jresS1efNOA1YjMzcPnD4_q64SVb0lNlJAsh24adXIyM9dZ 2aKBXRuECIG2ZMJw3JL_ay7dJbM0wxkZrbfedPQP3x84FBrA5DxrMiDJhVyV2E3rUuaWC2LLeiFG ZNZoBJqHnhkZBwY_H1PhBq7hSsiMGPK7zF8UO8YquNEOBXGVYeAMrBqZg0zPgOwnPGo7xRVqXp02 iOclF5gXYDRAD4RG9_._53kaOeEQFXBLocitk5AB7V Original-Received: from sonic.gate.mail.ne1.yahoo.com by sonic310.consmr.mail.ir2.yahoo.com with HTTP; Wed, 15 May 2019 20:46:37 +0000 Original-Received: from 2.152.205.184.dyn.user.ono.com (EHLO Ergus) ([2.152.205.184]) by smtp414.mail.ir2.yahoo.com (Oath Hermes SMTP Server) with ESMTPA ID af434c2ecc6055852380e0ddb3b3863b; Wed, 15 May 2019 20:46:33 +0000 (UTC) Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <87lfz7sqb9.fsf@telefonica.net> X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 3.x X-Received-From: 77.238.177.32 X-BeenThere: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: Users list for the GNU Emacs text editor List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "help-gnu-emacs" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.help:120423 Archived-At: On Wed, May 15, 2019 at 05:14:18PM +0200, �scar Fuentes wrote: >Dmitry Gutov writes: > >>> I think I already explained the issue, but I'll put it this way: what >>> you would do about C-c C-c on C-Mode and how that would help their >>> users? >> >> Pretty much what you suggested. Remove the binding and mention that in >> NEWS, together with the existing alternative. > >You forgot to mention how removing C-c C-c would help CC-Mode users. > >And, as already mentioned, comment-dwim is not an alternative to >comment-region. They do different things. > I agree that they are not the same, but I think also that users use one or the other in their workflow, so wasting 2 short (comfortable) bindings for the same action is not the right to do in any case. Also short commands like M-; should be prefixes (like C-c or C-x). In the unification process that's something that may be organized too: if the short bindings must provide simple commands like comment-region, or if they will provide more heuristic versions with dwim. And if the opposite actions will be prefixed with C-u or C-- >> Some users might be upset, most won't care, and some will be educated >> about the better alternative. The binding would also be freed for some >> feature in the future, like C-REPL maybe. > >So we have certain downsides in exchange for hypothetical future >advantages. > >Different modes have different requirements and it is natural that the >same bindings do specific things on each case. > Comment region is common to all languages, and send to terminal (or compile and execute) is common to most languages. >Following your logic, as we have some modes where C-c C-c sends text to >a terminal and others where it is used to indicate that the current >edition has ended (and others where it interrupts current execution, as >in Eshell) we should decide that the binding will do one and only one >thing, and remove it from all other modes where that thing does not >exists. > So... I am scared now to be sincere here... but yes. That's better (and more logical) than confusing and scare the users. Any way the bindings must be associated with primitive actions (most primitive and abstract the best because they will be applicable to more possible actions in more options) so the derived modes just need to re-implement the action but if they rebind the primitive in their config they still will keep uniformity. > >At the end, we deplete the available bindings from each mode just for >the cause of coherence. > But we won't have any conflict with external packages in some modes and not in others because the actions and the reserved bindings will be clear.. > >Doesn't look like an improvement to me. > > If everything is organized in advance it will be, actually it may simplify and reduce a lot of redundant code, reduce the manual (good for developers and the users because will need to read less to start working), avoid conflicts in the mailing list (and discussions like this). Help external developers to provide better packages at leas more organized and standard without conflicts with the internal functionalities.