From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Po Lu Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: master 72b1379f079: Increase `emacs-lisp-docstring-fill-column` to 72 Date: Sat, 03 Feb 2024 17:36:54 +0800 Message-ID: <875xz5nb2h.fsf@yahoo.com> References: <87il36mevf.fsf@yahoo.com> <4a52da5c-2252-4956-b6b2-b452e5be8c9f@alphapapa.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="7567"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org, stefankangas@gmail.com To: Adam Porter Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Sat Feb 03 10:37:57 2024 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 1rWCTE-0001jP-9f for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Sat, 03 Feb 2024 10:37:56 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1rWCSX-0000LL-2z; Sat, 03 Feb 2024 04:37:13 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1rWCSV-0000L0-Iw for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 03 Feb 2024 04:37:11 -0500 Original-Received: from sonic309-20.consmr.mail.ne1.yahoo.com ([66.163.184.146]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1rWCST-0006m6-Lw for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 03 Feb 2024 04:37:11 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yahoo.com; s=s2048; t=1706953027; bh=egcCC4VWWGO3n3fw3mRv6bIf/VOz/q6ESZzfsQLXPeQ=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:From:Subject:Reply-To; b=lZtIoshiioNuCRESOasCmssKgfvW8xMbFSSoPRkYClU2BX0Phs8DVxpU+SBLD0uxh2jbDnNVRpSnJne6g5ySWQ8MCizPm3rHk/WrBSKqkj4hdEgISU4gV5vALea1pI42H/i+2kxgdWYTpwJQ9QZa6hVmMXS8XJ/I0gqeKBOK+zmgYLCzC7aGX57PQNu8gEQMD2tFZLap4BiOuYxhfi4eHQGJ8ykysNErgDhnMFSIa+M/1cPELb5aI2VYstLIGgMQEHkToeUzLSmel6bib0IdXuie16oAwN6Fp4Q8NZ6oauZwVa3F4lMOSpec8tdZq1nLVfdaPQLEKqje6rl/rUkwJA== X-SONIC-DKIM-SIGN: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yahoo.com; s=s2048; t=1706953027; bh=4eC6Dl/VdBT+8dgtZ/DYiuuD3CWyiO8VgRHo3Cw3zDP=; h=X-Sonic-MF:From:To:Subject:Date:From:Subject; b=jpdR1mPHy1uJhixVgqwA2+g159pteJfMt+XgTQ5eQ9DTlj2IUFcAkP17u08sxn2yxSWnBbLnHU1BndGjPuO89a0sGXJSw8+pb6gWVg5udghRIkOo71ii4ynjnPQ7x2RhYSRFApkhz5Tc5xnFmVe2QOJSXqJS/eOIfo76iqYAfKqwVkEn8a1XfjfMSCtQg5ROYCa/3SCeLPlQWNTHoaktmQXBFF3VU7ou0FvbDrFECTFzoAsfc6yGyKIYuwa0YEnFBi/zZjLFMPDOG2WbbYRtdEDK5RKuQ6bIWQqUxtSgq9JAfPIiEjsAeIJP4u8JphXR63xX8zdhvOkDaFuP0gTfZw== X-YMail-OSG: SGaKiVsVM1l12MMT3fMBFQFown_Xu4COzxe0CjncdBxvJPwZTyeLKv5joXABP_z kDvB36yx44vW0ogsGaWTvS8JSyYLOjKCmAy3BYkLy9zIAh5Mvb1wpUg2YYEiqhouIyCFYeFa0YRW _Hju3tm9MSZ8tp7JiftJoTeiFhAQN5jVkEF5iD34HfmTyZNXCPpFNWFqKzd4Ml9_W8G7RWjxsIIl TEmHBqWLTMISZwCWqbisFo_MKWBmxJnQ0DtvUOL2t9xHIWNZ4uBdamZlcwp9SPbCFTVc23JNfnAs crYes1.p4kiTUEqubMAfixLgGSueKAYiBCySb_UF6mz.r7eA0kC7Xr65EExsjbtjWo2kVxipjE6b WwEEjXUYhA3AzCF9P4kAX7M2bvoQ3JxrUfH4fmytmNdDCiYYJT5XeLqkT5TXRLW6sP1CxaomsROR sy2hzS4XWL4XfRkp8si8QTU2FlVD_jYM_WK_X7_vNjzWDvSHL_EygQ2Lbx0l1Rsx34moFtJX5Dqz Vu2n5LOIxF.5nRLSThlc9.mbzCMXBY2QTa5WFAkK9vSlUeUiZggx7FZ4m9z15SgTeS5nPzaH_D2S ._UEanj3zE0hxLg2nnqSfQnmlsSvddVxFMS95Cg9t77I6X9kkYbYqC3SiIAfP7nmhAig._dcd2_z MWrO03DK3ouqUDTMLgJI9e07vskv0NK4GQYvO4BoCc9O6g.Zo.MMZKPpSP8_PjjkHRifeB_pVeIk lrxq_GeAJ2tBqq23W1eqd7v7B4hExeMqq.ZDYKDbqu0eeoeLooN4.zQBBQzQ16DOBiO1ovg_054O 942UGphs2Oq_n7OTq4b3pUoy50dJJBoBZurbrPyJ0j X-Sonic-MF: X-Sonic-ID: 865a495c-8ae2-47d3-abdb-8e662c545f3a Original-Received: from sonic.gate.mail.ne1.yahoo.com by sonic309.consmr.mail.ne1.yahoo.com with HTTP; Sat, 3 Feb 2024 09:37:07 +0000 Original-Received: by hermes--production-sg3-6dc75bc8fb-zp62z (Yahoo Inc. Hermes SMTP Server) with ESMTPA ID c207010a3473dcb650b4c209c3455c2e; Sat, 03 Feb 2024 09:37:00 +0000 (UTC) In-Reply-To: <4a52da5c-2252-4956-b6b2-b452e5be8c9f@alphapapa.net> (Adam Porter's message of "Sat, 3 Feb 2024 02:04:29 -0600") X-Mailer: WebService/1.1.22046 mail.backend.jedi.jws.acl:role.jedi.acl.token.atz.jws.hermes.yahoo Received-SPF: pass client-ip=66.163.184.146; envelope-from=luangruo@yahoo.com; helo=sonic309-20.consmr.mail.ne1.yahoo.com X-Spam_score_int: -20 X-Spam_score: -2.1 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.1 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01 autolearn=ham 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-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:315800 Archived-At: Adam Porter writes: > I don't think these two things are comparable. The change to register > commands affected users' workflows, i.e. the keypresses they make by > habit after many years of usage. Having a change like that appear > suddenly is kind of like finding a new pothole in a road one travels > every day (although one that shouldn't require a paving machine to > fix, being Emacs). > > Having symbol docstrings be 8 characters wider will probably not > affect many users negatively. I'm sure there are a few who have their > windows precisely limited to the necessary width; if possible, it > would be good to make it easy for them to keep such configuration with > pleasant results. The distinction to bear in mind is that users of registers are outnumbered overwhelmingly by readers of doc strings, and thus even a minor change to the format of doc strings will impact more people than a change to the mechanics of saving and restoring registers, even though doc strings are not as frequently the subject of active interaction. > But should that keep the docstrings at 64 characters wide forever? > And are we to vote on such changes across the whole user population? > This seems like the kind of change that the maintainers are to make > using their best judgment. The rhetorical implications of these two questions take an absolute stance on the relation between change and debate, which is not helpful. What I would have liked to see was neither a categorical dismissal of the change, nor an exhaustive and involved plebiscite of the entire user-base, but an opportunity for interested individuals to have brought their viewpoints to the table before the change was installed. > I don't agree. While I don't feel strongly either way, as one who > frequently writes new docstrings, the arbitrary limit is felt. One > often must resort to awkward wording or abbreviated variable names to > fit within it. And if one doesn't do so, one can't get a clean > linting pass. Meanwhile, any window in my Emacs sessions that > displays a help buffer has many columns of blank space to the right of > the docstrings. And the existing limit is far from being too wide to > be read comfortably. Whether that is true or not, raising the limit by 8 characters creates very little improvement in all of these respects. Even the worst of modern displays can guarantee Emacs 80 columns of space, so it is not a convincing compromise, and cannot be described except as an arbitrary choice. However, the more important issue is that such a discussion as we are having now should have predated the installation of the change, and my attempt to initiate one after the change should not have been answered by an ultimatum eliminating all but the least feasible option. > I'm not sure how to interpret your characterization of the thread I > posted on Reddit. For the record, I was not being critical of the > Emacs development process; I was suggesting to users that, unless they > want to actively participate in the Emacs development process (i.e. by > faithfully reporting bugs that are discovered in unreleased versions), > they should use released versions of Emacs; and that they should > definitely use only released versions of Emacs when reporting bugs to > package developers, because otherwise I can't try to reproduce the > reported problems without running such an unreleased version myself. > > Then, as usual, the discussion went its own way, largely > misinterpreting my initial comment, but that's Reddit (and life). I was not attempting to interpret your words, but to explain what factors, IMHO, gave rise to the generally hostile nature of the responses it received, so please don't regard it as any reflection on yourself. > They seem somewhat comparable in that they are displayed similarly in > Emacs buffers and are wrapped to a certain width. One could ask why > their appearances shouldn't be more consistent. The proper time for asking that question was when both formats were still being designed. Consistency is a far cry from an end in itself, and the only ends here are aesthetic in nature.