RE: [Emacs-diffs] master 51e7e46: Font-lock elisp macros/special forms dynamically

[Drew Adams <drew.adams@oracle.com>]

> Is it really a good idea to highlight *all* macros? Many are meant to be
> used just like functions and have the same semantics. Instead of
> updating a big macro regexp after load, there should be a `declare'
> attribute that would let specific macros (and functions) opt into being
> fontified specially.
> 
> As it is, I'm going to have to disable this functionality locally.

+1

Just what is this additional highlighting really trying to
accomplish?  What problem is it trying to fix?  Presumably this
corresponds to bug #20096, whose sole motivation was said to be:

"I like the addition of if-let and when-let in subr-x.el. However,
they should also be highlighted as keywords if subr-x is loaded."

To that "I like", the "fix" proposed by Stefan was: "change
elisp-mode's font-lock rules so they check obarray for macros",
and highlight them all.  As Stefan put it: "That should kill
several birds with a single (big) stone."

A big stone, indeed.  But what are the "several birds" that need
to be killed, and why?  No mention.

From two unhighlighted macros that one user wants highlighted,
we've moved to highlighting all macros.  No discussion of the
why-do-this; discussion only of how-to-do-it.

If you must introduce such exhuberent highlighting, perhaps you
would consider throttling it via `font-lock-maximum-decoration'?

(And maybe consider highlighting only those two "I like" macros?)

Yes to Daniel's "let specific...opt into being fontified specially".

http://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=20096