From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "Drew Adams" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: RE: Guile in Emacs Date: Thu, 15 Apr 2010 09:13:28 -0700 Message-ID: <345707DD850E4DBAAD1ACA687DC5A514@us.oracle.com> References: <4B8147A9.7030504@gmail.com> <873a0cyv3r.fsf@lola.goethe.zz> <87aauiho3y.fsf_-_@lifelogs.com><1271028837.6164.55.camel@dell-desktop.example.com><1271102739.6067.38.camel@dell-desktop.example.com><8039yz34ka.fsf@tiny.isode.net><1271173887.6067.53.camel@dell-desktop.example.com> <87FA5F05CB9C41409B9E72BD06D7C8CF@us.oracle.com><87fx2xp839.fsf@lola.goethe.zz><3EFDD45EB5AD4018B8FEA8F13CFEDA32@us.oracle.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1271349920 11856 80.91.229.12 (15 Apr 2010 16:45:20 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 15 Apr 2010 16:45:20 +0000 (UTC) Cc: 'David Kastrup' , emacs-devel@gnu.org To: "'Jeff Clough'" , Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu Apr 15 18:45:17 2010 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 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1O2SBo-0002tX-HP for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 15 Apr 2010 18:45:16 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:37245 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1O2SBn-0003cI-Sk for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 15 Apr 2010 12:45:15 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1O2RhQ-0001rp-Co for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 15 Apr 2010 12:13:52 -0400 Original-Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=51555 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1O2RhP-0001qg-2x for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 15 Apr 2010 12:13:52 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1O2RhN-0006Sa-L1 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 15 Apr 2010 12:13:51 -0400 Original-Received: from rcsinet11.oracle.com ([148.87.113.123]:49978) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1O2RhN-0006SP-FY; Thu, 15 Apr 2010 12:13:49 -0400 Original-Received: from acsinet15.oracle.com (acsinet15.oracle.com [141.146.126.227]) by rcsinet11.oracle.com (Switch-3.4.2/Switch-3.4.2) with ESMTP id o3FGDjFp010743 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Thu, 15 Apr 2010 16:13:47 GMT Original-Received: from acsmt354.oracle.com (acsmt354.oracle.com [141.146.40.154]) by acsinet15.oracle.com (Switch-3.4.2/Switch-3.4.1) with ESMTP id o3EK3OXF004621; Thu, 15 Apr 2010 16:13:43 GMT Original-Received: from abhmt009.oracle.com by acsmt354.oracle.com with ESMTP id 163543411271348009; Thu, 15 Apr 2010 09:13:29 -0700 Original-Received: from dradamslap1 (/130.35.178.194) by default (Oracle Beehive Gateway v4.0) with ESMTP ; Thu, 15 Apr 2010 09:13:29 -0700 X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 11 In-Reply-To: Thread-Index: Acrcox26XYnIm4kjRVuEQQMo2mzV/gAEggyw X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.5579 X-Source-IP: acsmt354.oracle.com [141.146.40.154] X-Auth-Type: Internal IP X-CT-RefId: str=0001.0A090203.4BC73B38.0043:SCFMA4539814,ss=1,fgs=0 X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 3) 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:123712 Archived-At: > I think having cross references between the four sources > described above is a great thing. There should be more > of that today. According to *your* argument: For any topic, you should be able to find an explanation of *everything* about that topic (including all possible relations and ramifications) in *one* place. According to your argument, cross references are anathema - not even a necessary evil, but something that can and should be dispensed with. Do you get it now? Your argument is in fact an argument against *any* doc organization. It is an argument against cross references and the need for or the utility of cross references.