From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: master 0161c9d 1/2: Load all generic-x.el modes unconditionally Date: Wed, 10 Feb 2021 19:10:35 +0200 Message-ID: <83im6zj1bo.fsf@gnu.org> References: <20210209160550.18823.10795@vcs0.savannah.gnu.org> <20210209160551.832FB20AD1@vcs0.savannah.gnu.org> <87o8gti2ln.fsf@gnus.org> <83sg65jffx.fsf@gnu.org> <83im71j96z.fsf@gnu.org> <83czx8k3gn.fsf@gnu.org> <83sg64hqzj.fsf@gnu.org> Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="3838"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: larsi@gnus.org, monnier@iro.umontreal.ca, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Stefan Kangas Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Wed Feb 10 18:39:19 2021 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1l9tSQ-0000sr-IE for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Wed, 10 Feb 2021 18:39:18 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:39794 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1l9tSP-00038w-Jt for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Wed, 10 Feb 2021 12:39:17 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:49052) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1l9t0h-0005BO-3H for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 10 Feb 2021 12:10:39 -0500 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]:47645) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1l9t0g-000880-Kb; Wed, 10 Feb 2021 12:10:38 -0500 Original-Received: from 84.94.185.95.cable.012.net.il ([84.94.185.95]:3676 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1l9t0e-0003cG-QL; Wed, 10 Feb 2021 12:10:37 -0500 In-Reply-To: (message from Stefan Kangas on Wed, 10 Feb 2021 10:44:35 -0600) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 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-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:264310 Archived-At: > From: Stefan Kangas > Date: Wed, 10 Feb 2021 10:44:35 -0600 > Cc: larsi@gnus.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org > > > I thought it was clear: suddenly those users will have a gazillion > > modes defined they never intended to use or load or even know about. > > Could we perhaps take another step back here and ask: why is that a > problem? generic-x is unusual, in that it defines a very large number of modes. It's like a large collection of small files, each one of which defines a separate mode. So it included a mechanism to pretend only some of the file was loaded. > To my mind, I only run the risk of getting some unexpected syntax > highlighting (which would actually be welcome in my use). > > If the generic modes themselves are worse than having no syntax > highlighting, they should either be fixed or removed. > > What am I missing? Users might not want some file suddenly turn on a mode the user didn't intend to use. I don't understand what else there is to explain here, really.