Re: Is intellisense features integration in Emacs technically possible?

["Stephen J. Turnbull" <stephen@xemacs.org>]

Eli Zaretskii writes:
 > > From: "Stephen J. Turnbull" <stephen@xemacs.org>
 > > Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org
 > > Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2014 17:13:50 +0900
 > > 
 > > So the core is about 13KLOC (redisplay.c, redisplay.h, and
 > > redisplay-output.c).  By contrast, if you take out composite.c and
 > > bidi.c (features XEmacs doesn't have), xdisp.c, dispnew.c, and
 > > dispextern.h are about 40KLOC, 3X as much.
 > 
 > Not sure it's worth to continue this line counting, but just for the
 > record: AFAIU, you should add more XEmacs files to the "core", because
 > xdisp.c covers some areas which in XEmacs are on separate files.

No, that's backwards to my point.  I don't care if XEmacs has less
code to support redisplay than Emacs does (modulo the "less
functionality" aspect, I'd be disappointed if the comparison isn't
approximately proportional to functionality).  My point is precisely
that Emacs's "core" is much bigger than XEmacs's because it includes
additional functionality.

Of course in C (and most languages) division into files is rather
arbitrary.  Perhaps the size of xdisp.c *doesn't* reflect
substantially greater coupling among the functions it defines.  But
division into more files does help the developer to *reduce* coupling
(by use of "static" to remind her that this variable shouldn't be used
outside of this file, for example).  And reduced coupling often leads
to easier porting.