From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: =?utf-8?Q?=C3=93scar_Fuentes?= Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Motif support Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2021 15:15:03 +0100 Message-ID: <8735mozno8.fsf@telefonica.net> References: <878rwhbb91.fsf.ref@yahoo.com> <878rwhbb91.fsf@yahoo.com> <83ee699irm.fsf@gnu.org> <87r1a99icp.fsf@yahoo.com> <835yrl9gob.fsf@gnu.org> <87fsqp9cvn.fsf@yahoo.com> <87mtkwzxpd.fsf@telefonica.net> <871r2898rl.fsf@yahoo.com> <87ilvkzx1m.fsf@telefonica.net> <87wnk07tfq.fsf@yahoo.com> <87sfuo7t0a.fsf@yahoo.com> <87czlszvcu.fsf@telefonica.net> <87h7b47rie.fsf@yahoo.com> <878rwgztoc.fsf@telefonica.net> <83ilvk9292.fsf@gnu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="11754"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/29.0.50 (gnu/linux) To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Cancel-Lock: sha1:0FLHJORTzBk3rOvg79fKqKfAIOc= Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Sun Dec 19 15:16:26 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 1mywzB-0002pp-SK for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Sun, 19 Dec 2021 15:16:25 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:35500 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mywzA-0005M9-Ds for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Sun, 19 Dec 2021 09:16:24 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:58286) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mywy7-0004by-2y for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 19 Dec 2021 09:15:19 -0500 Original-Received: from ciao.gmane.io ([116.202.254.214]:58262) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mywy5-0005Z8-Cg for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 19 Dec 2021 09:15:18 -0500 Original-Received: from list by ciao.gmane.io with local (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1mywy1-0001Lr-BJ for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 19 Dec 2021 15:15:13 +0100 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ Received-SPF: pass client-ip=116.202.254.214; envelope-from=ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; helo=ciao.gmane.io X-Spam_score_int: -15 X-Spam_score: -1.6 X-Spam_bar: - X-Spam_report: (-1.6 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.25, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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:282438 Archived-At: Eli Zaretskii writes: >> I worked on some code bases much larger than Emacs' C part, >> with an application domain much more technical and specialized, and >> achieved productivity on non-trivial tasks after a few hours of study. >> Those are projects that put a lot of thought on code architecture, both >> macro and micro, with no tolerance for long-lived hacks or "somehow this >> seems to work" changes. > > Either those projects were redesigned and rewritten every few years, Yes. Well, sort of. Not really rewritten as in "let's scrap everything an begin anew", but there were no misgivings about rethinking, changing and scraping things when they seemed to start going out of hands. > or they stopped getting significant changes after several years. > > Emacs has its major part rewritten only very rarely (the display > engine in Emacs 21 and the handling of non-ASCII in Emacs 20 and then > again in Emacs 23 are basically the only examples that come to mind). > Emacs is also a highly interactive program with many extensions "in > the wild", so it must stay compatible throughout the changes. And > finally, I very much doubt that any other project supports so many > different UI frameworks. AFAIK a lot of the complexity on the display engine comes from shoehorning a GUI on top of a TUI design. > These differences explain why you don't frequently see the complexity > we have in Emacs. > > And please don't take this as a defense of what we have, it's just a > statement of some facts we should keep in mind. Agreed. If the technical exigence on Emacs were as high as in those other projects, probably Emacs would be dead by now for lack of contributors. Different environments, different applications, different state of mind of contributors (vocational payjob vs scratch-an-itch on free time), etc. That said, the combination of micro-changes (features plus bug fixes) combined with the principle of "if it works, don't fix it" is too easily perceptible on Emacs :-)