Re: Recent attempts at standardizing major mode definitions.

[Luc Teirlinck <teirllm@dms.auburn.edu>]

Stefan Monnier wrote:

   Could please state clearly what are the bugs ?
   I.e. a set of commands that shows a behavior you didn't expect ?

M-x list-abbrevs
C-x m
M-x list-abbrevs

I described the resulting behavior in my previous message.  I did not
expect that behavior.  Apparently you are claiming I should have
expected it.  I disagree.  I will respond to the more technical issues
you raised when I have more time to look at them.

At present let me just say that the following and related parts of
your two messages look strange to me:

   As for abbrev-tables, they are suboptimally shared (via poor man's
   inheritance) which is not that bad either.

Expansion of an abbrev can depend on such things as the creation or
non-creation of unrelated buffers.  Unless the user really knows your
code extremely well and, in addition to that, is willing to put up
with quite some inconvenience and be extremely attentive and careful,
abbrev expansion is essentially a lottery system.  I am an Emacs user
and as a user, I consider this to be extremely bad, not just "a little
bit" bad.  It seems strange to me that you seem to disagree with this.
(Or am I misunderstanding you?)

Sincerely,

Luc.