From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: When should ralloc.c be used? (WAS: bug#24358) Date: Sun, 30 Oct 2016 00:57:53 +0300 Message-ID: <8337jerf6m.fsf@gnu.org> References: <87twe6sx2g.fsf@users.sourceforge.net> <87eg51ng4r.fsf_-_@users.sourceforge.net> <87k2djwumn.fsf@users.sourceforge.net> <83h98nidvd.fsf@gnu.org> <87eg3rvtsf.fsf@users.sourceforge.net> <83k2dihpm9.fsf@gnu.org> <8760p2wzgj.fsf@users.sourceforge.net> <838ttyhhzu.fsf@gnu.org> <871szqwu51.fsf@users.sourceforge.net> <831szqhbc2.fsf@gnu.org> <87d1itt79z.fsf_-_@users.sourceforge.net> <7baa18d4-2b09-caa8-005e-29008a383ad1@cs.ucla.edu> <83mvhwrgd5.fsf@gnu.org> <8539f38f-9a11-44c3-4de7-bb974c96206c@cs.ucla.edu> <83d1iq5ib1.fsf@gnu.org> <83r3753c8j.fsf@gnu.org> <83r374wh32.fsf@gnu.org> <83wpgtrmt2.fsf@gnu.org> <83twbvr78y.fsf@gnu.org> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1477778327 22730 195.159.176.226 (29 Oct 2016 21:58:47 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 29 Oct 2016 21:58:47 +0000 (UTC) Cc: eggert@cs.ucla.edu, emacs-devel@gnu.org, npostavs@users.sourceforge.net To: rms@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Oct 29 23:58:43 2016 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1c0bdz-0003eU-Tf for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 29 Oct 2016 23:58:28 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:56189 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1c0be2-00048k-Je for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 29 Oct 2016 17:58:30 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:43194) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1c0bdT-00047z-NU for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 29 Oct 2016 17:57:56 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1c0bdP-0003yT-A9 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 29 Oct 2016 17:57:55 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::e]:56886) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1c0bdP-0003yP-6z; Sat, 29 Oct 2016 17:57:51 -0400 Original-Received: from 84.94.185.246.cable.012.net.il ([84.94.185.246]:2022 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:128) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1c0bdI-0005h1-1b; Sat, 29 Oct 2016 17:57:44 -0400 In-reply-to: (message from Richard Stallman on Sat, 29 Oct 2016 12:38:48 -0400) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 2001:4830:134:3::e X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:208964 Archived-At: > From: Richard Stallman > CC: eggert@cs.ucla.edu, npostavs@users.sourceforge.net, > emacs-devel@gnu.org > Date: Sat, 29 Oct 2016 12:38:48 -0400 > > > For you and me (and a few others), maybe. For most of the current > > Emacs contributors it's nowhere near "simple enough", because it > > requires one to be familiar with intimate details of Emacs object > > design and implementation. > > No it doesn't. The code to look at objects and output them this way > wouldn't have to know any more about how they are represented > than the code for Fprinc. The code like in princ (actually in its subroutines) is exactly what I think we should try to avoid. > The idea that all C code should be regarded as unmaintainable > is a nonstarter. I didn't say it will be unmaintainable, I said its maintenance will be harder than of Lisp code.