From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Tests, Emacs-25 and Conditional Features Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2016 20:37:34 +0200 Message-ID: <83twk38wep.fsf@gnu.org> References: <87k2l2zgre.fsf@russet.org.uk> <87h9g6xzrb.fsf@gmx.de> <87shzpxvfv.fsf@russet.org.uk> <83bn6d9iml.fsf@gnu.org> <87zitwf4pz.fsf@russet.org.uk> <831t789h95.fsf@gnu.org> <87r3f7em8x.fsf@russet.org.uk> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1458326297 14830 80.91.229.3 (18 Mar 2016 18:38:17 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2016 18:38:17 +0000 (UTC) Cc: michael.albinus@gmx.de, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: phillip.lord@russet.org.uk (Phillip Lord) Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Mar 18 19:38:17 2016 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@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 1agzHs-00025s-RR for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 18 Mar 2016 19:38:16 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:45727 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1agzHs-0004ny-6o for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 18 Mar 2016 14:38:16 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:47474) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1agzHe-0004lG-UD for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 18 Mar 2016 14:38:03 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1agzHc-0007Go-6G for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 18 Mar 2016 14:38:02 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::e]:54043) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1agzHc-0007Gk-2i; Fri, 18 Mar 2016 14:38:00 -0400 Original-Received: from 84.94.185.246.cable.012.net.il ([84.94.185.246]:1549 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:128) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1agzHb-0007Fh-BK; Fri, 18 Mar 2016 14:37:59 -0400 In-reply-to: <87r3f7em8x.fsf@russet.org.uk> (phillip.lord@russet.org.uk) 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: 2.1.14 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-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:201841 Archived-At: > From: phillip.lord@russet.org.uk (Phillip Lord) > Cc: michael.albinus@gmx.de, emacs-devel@gnu.org > Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2016 17:20:30 +0000 > > Eli Zaretskii writes: > >> Michael's example shows, we have a gnutls-available-p function which > >> is defined if gnutls is not available, but for libxml, we check for > >> non-definition of functions. > > > > It would be trivial to add a libxml2-available-p function, but I fail > > to see how is this different from using fboundp. And AFAIU, in the > > context of this discussion, you don't want to trust the likes of > > gnutls-available-p, either. > > One is one way, the other is the other way. > > Principle of least surprise and all that stuff. Are we still talking about the feature test you wanted to have?