Re: Auto Fill Comments

[Christopher Dimech <dimech@gmx.com>]

> Sent: Friday, November 27, 2020 at 7:07 PM
> From: "Christopher Dimech" <dimech@gmx.com>
> To: tomas@tuxteam.de
> Cc: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org
> Subject: Re: Auto Fill Comments
>
>
> > Sent: Friday, November 27, 2020 at 6:53 PM
> > From: tomas@tuxteam.de
> > To: "Christopher Dimech" <dimech@gmx.com>
> > Cc: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org
> > Subject: Re: Auto Fill Comments
> >
> > On Fri, Nov 27, 2020 at 06:41:44PM +0100, Christopher Dimech wrote:
> > >
> > > > Sent: Friday, November 27, 2020 at 5:02 PM
> > > > From: tomas@tuxteam.de
> >
> > [...]
> >
> > > > > On that last sentence that is so. It is not always the failure of
> > > > > readers [...]
> > > >
> > > > Most definitely not.
> >
> > To clarify: I think trying to think of this as the "failure of some
> > person" is an error. It's a failure of communication.
> >
> > >                        But when I find myself paraphrasing (badly, at
> > > > that) what's already written in the manual, I've to step back and
> > > > ask myself whether I'm doing anything wrong.
> > >
> > > You tried to explain it better, but think the wording in the manual
> > > described things better.
> >
> > This was my realisation, too :)
> >
> > >                            Nothing wrong about that.  Thank you for
> > > trying to clarify things.  Also, there is nothing wrong with giving
> > > up.  I was just saying how it was for me, that's all.
> >
> > I'm not giving up. Just stepping back to think. Your input helps,
> > appreciated.
> >
> > > As more people get to use emacs, what was adequate before, becomes
> > > inadequate.
> >
> > Sometimes it's just difficult to wrap one's head around things.
> > "Local" variables with different kinds of locality is one of
> > those, but they are there for a reason. Life in Emacs without
> > buffer-local variables would be way more difficult.
>
> My experience has been that as I got to do more things in emacs lisp,
> the understanding needed quickly exceeded my rate of learning.
> One can get to sophisticated constructs, even when trying to do
> relatively simple things.  You never know where your original
> plan could get you. Many times the importance of a work is not
> measured by its consequences (i.e. by the final command).
>
>
> > Imagine the mess a complex mode (like CC mode) would be if you
> > always had to consult some buffer-bound data structure instead
> > of having buffer-local variables disguised as "globals".
> >
> > Imagine the organizational mess minor modes would be.
> >
> > Now my head hurts :)
> >
> > >             Many things will change and people would want to use it
> > > in different ways and at different levels of sophistication.  A
> > > possibility could be not about writing more, but organise better.

This is what has to be understood - Gnu needs to start thinking about
having different levels of sophistication within its packages.  Historically,
it has always been about the end result. As long as things work people were
satisfied.  It sounds reasonable from the surface, but quite problematic after
one introspects the subsurface.

Regards
Christopher

> > > After all we want that others are pleased with our work.
> >
> > Definitely.
> >
> > Cheers
> >  - t
> >
>
>