From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Drew Adams Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.help Subject: RE: `looking-back' strange warning Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2015 22:12:37 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <4e720684-b2cf-4e74-be53-a20208f94328@default> References: <560B9C7F.2060301@easy-emacs.de> <560CD7CE.4010404@yandex.ru> <6524c81a-949c-40d1-b990-d214d6ee5b60@default> <560D73DF.8040403@yandex.ru> <560D7A68.8040404@easy-emacs.de> <560D8289.6010409@yandex.ru> <560D8F96.5040200@easy-emacs.de> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1443762789 4738 80.91.229.3 (2 Oct 2015 05:13:09 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 2 Oct 2015 05:13:09 +0000 (UTC) To: Stefan Monnier , help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Original-X-From: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Oct 02 07:12:56 2015 Return-path: Envelope-to: geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1ZhseO-0003yv-6f for geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Fri, 02 Oct 2015 07:12:56 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:57543 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZhseN-0007lu-HW for geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Fri, 02 Oct 2015 01:12:55 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:56563) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZhseB-0007lo-Fq for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 02 Oct 2015 01:12:44 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Zhse8-0001uu-9w for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 02 Oct 2015 01:12:43 -0400 Original-Received: from userp1040.oracle.com ([156.151.31.81]:42564) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Zhse8-0001uh-2R for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 02 Oct 2015 01:12:40 -0400 Original-Received: from userv0022.oracle.com (userv0022.oracle.com [156.151.31.74]) by userp1040.oracle.com (Sentrion-MTA-4.3.2/Sentrion-MTA-4.3.2) with ESMTP id t925Cdkf027601 (version=TLSv1 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Fri, 2 Oct 2015 05:12:39 GMT Original-Received: from userv0121.oracle.com (userv0121.oracle.com [156.151.31.72]) by userv0022.oracle.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id t925Cd1Q004518 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Fri, 2 Oct 2015 05:12:39 GMT Original-Received: from abhmp0009.oracle.com (abhmp0009.oracle.com [141.146.116.15]) by userv0121.oracle.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id t925Cch8018104; Fri, 2 Oct 2015 05:12:39 GMT In-Reply-To: X-Priority: 3 X-Mailer: Oracle Beehive Extensions for Outlook 2.0.1.9 (901082) [OL 12.0.6691.5000 (x86)] X-Source-IP: userv0022.oracle.com [156.151.31.74] X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.4.x-2.6.x [generic] X-Received-From: 156.151.31.81 X-BeenThere: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: Users list for the GNU Emacs text editor List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.help:107454 Archived-At: > Making it optional Encourages people to think that looking-at is just > like looking-back, with the same performance characteristic, Clarifying such things is what doc is for. (Yes, and even sometimes byte-compiler messages.) > whereas making it mandatory encourages people to put a > reasonable limit and hence avoid pathological behavior > at the end of large buffers. But you have _not_ made it mandatory. Have you? And yet you issue a "warning" saying that it is mandatory (or whatever "2-3 required" arguments is supposed to mean). False alarm. (Circulez ; il n'y a rien a voir.) There are many, many "best practices" that are handled normally by documenting them, including many, many that involve far more serious consequences than a slowdown from leaving off a LIMIT argument for `looking-back'. Really. Programmers are used to such notes. And even much more important performance (and correctness and completeness) guidelines are not blown out of proportion and dressed up as phony "warnings". (This "M'as-tu vu ?!!" is the equivalent of a flashy 1995 web page with loads of revolving animated GIFs. Another distraction in a sea of distraction.) Not a big deal in any case, on its own. But symptomatic of a misguided approach to communicating such helpful but non-critical info to users. Sprinkling "**WARNING!!!**" everywhere, for even the slightest bits of notable information, dilutes what real warnings are about. It decreases the signal-to-noise ratio, and just "encourages" people to ignore such messages altogether, which is not helpful and no doubt not what was intended.