From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: David Kastrup Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Strange change in bytecmop.el Date: Tue, 26 Jul 2005 14:38:58 +0200 Message-ID: <85k6jdn3ml.fsf@lola.goethe.zz> References: <87sly54b2s.fsf-monnier+emacs@gnu.org> <85ek9o40hg.fsf@lola.goethe.zz> <85mzobzlvk.fsf@lola.goethe.zz> <85y87unegt.fsf@lola.goethe.zz> NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1122383439 22941 80.91.229.2 (26 Jul 2005 13:10:39 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 26 Jul 2005 13:10:39 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org, rms@gnu.org, monnier@iro.umontreal.ca Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Jul 26 15:10:32 2005 Return-path: Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1DxPBL-0006Ej-1P for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 26 Jul 2005 15:09:15 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1DxPDf-0000S3-RI for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 26 Jul 2005 09:11:39 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1DxP7d-0005Tl-TG for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 26 Jul 2005 09:05:26 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1DxP7b-0005RK-Lo for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 26 Jul 2005 09:05:23 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1DxP5A-0004Dh-6M for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 26 Jul 2005 09:02:52 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.164] (helo=fencepost.gnu.org) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1DxOsv-0000SM-GE for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 26 Jul 2005 08:50:13 -0400 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lola.goethe.zz) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1DxOhY-0004dZ-My; Tue, 26 Jul 2005 08:38:28 -0400 Original-Received: by lola.goethe.zz (Postfix, from userid 1002) id 1F6121C4CD77; Tue, 26 Jul 2005 14:38:59 +0200 (CEST) Original-To: Juanma Barranquero User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.0.50 (gnu/linux) 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:41224 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:41224 Juanma Barranquero writes: > On 7/26/05, David Kastrup wrote: > >> I really think that this is one change that we are better off without. > > I didn't propose it, so I'm hardly going to enter a fight for it. I > just happen to think is not only not as outrageous as you made it > sound (when you said "This is so backwards that I consider it > repulsive."), but I even think that could be useful. Well, we have to agree to disagree, then. I can see no even slightly relevant political advantages for this (I am apparently in disagreement with Richard here, even given rather similar goals), and it adds no new functionality whatsoever, at the cost of backward incompatibilities. If there are no new points to make, I suggest we all just wait with baited breath what Richard will decide, and then either of us will have the opportunity to be exasperated. Though it does not sound like you in particular would mind much either which way. -- David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum