From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Dan Nicolaescu Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: update-subdirs and lisp/term Date: Sat, 26 Sep 2009 09:45:46 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <200909261645.n8QGjk9R001369@godzilla.ics.uci.edu> References: <831vlut4sy.fsf@gnu.org> <83ws3mrm6f.fsf@gnu.org> <83r5ttsmq0.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1253983777 32240 80.91.229.12 (26 Sep 2009 16:49:37 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 26 Sep 2009 16:49:37 +0000 (UTC) Cc: schwab@linux-m68k.org, Stefan Monnier , emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Sep 26 18:49:30 2009 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1MraSc-00012E-BQ for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 26 Sep 2009 18:49:26 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:60971 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1MraSb-0000B5-SN for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 26 Sep 2009 12:49:25 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1MraSX-0000As-4G for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 26 Sep 2009 12:49:21 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1MraSQ-0000AW-VN for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 26 Sep 2009 12:49:19 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=39053 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1MraSQ-0000AT-Se for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 26 Sep 2009 12:49:14 -0400 Original-Received: from barrelv2.ics.uci.edu ([128.195.1.114]:61709) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:DHE_RSA_3DES_EDE_CBC_SHA1:24) (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1MraSO-00017d-06; Sat, 26 Sep 2009 12:49:12 -0400 Original-Received: from godzilla.ics.uci.edu (godzilla.ics.uci.edu [128.195.10.101]) by barrelv2.ics.uci.edu (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n8QGjmMC014938; Sat, 26 Sep 2009 09:45:48 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: (from dann@localhost) by godzilla.ics.uci.edu (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.6/Submit) id n8QGjk9R001369; Sat, 26 Sep 2009 09:45:46 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <83r5ttsmq0.fsf@gnu.org> (Eli Zaretskii's message of "Sat, 26 Sep 2009 19:19:03 +0300") Original-Lines: 36 X-ICS-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more information X-ICS-MailScanner-ID: n8QGjmMC014938 X-ICS-MailScanner: Found to be clean X-ICS-MailScanner-SpamCheck: not spam, SpamAssassin (score=-1.44, required 5, autolearn=disabled, ALL_TRUSTED -1.44) X-ICS-MailScanner-From: dann@godzilla.ics.uci.edu X-detected-operating-system: by monty-python.gnu.org: Solaris 10 (beta) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:115664 Archived-At: Eli Zaretskii writes: > > From: Stefan Monnier > > Cc: Andreas Schwab , emacs-devel@gnu.org > > Date: Sat, 26 Sep 2009 10:07:34 -0400 > > > > >> > Does anyone know why we skip lisp/term in update-subdirs? > > >> Because files in lisp/term are always loaded with the term/ prefix. > > > Thanks. But why is that a good idea? > > > > It reduces the length of load-path and increases our namespace? > > But this can be said about any other subdirectory of lisp/, can't it? > > > Let me put it another way: why would it be a good idea to put lisp/term > > in update-subdirs? > > To avoid a special case that someone could trip on. Every other > subdirectory gets subdirs.el created in it, but term does not. > Imagine that we will want to have subdirectories under term some day. > Why ask maintainers to use up one more register for remembering this > factoid, or risk strange failures/bugs? > > That said, I won't argue. If the above is not convincing, then so be > it. IMHO it's not convincing at all. Let's look at the history, the latest files added in lisp/term: term/common-win.el on 2008-07-20 (it's just a refactoring of existing term/*win.el files) term/ns-win.el on 2008-07-15 -- new port, we don't get these very often, we have 4 total... term/cygwin.el on 2005-07-22 term/linux.el on 1997-07-04 Based on the past, the probability of something dramatic happening there is very small, and it can be dealt with at the time it happens.