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: emacs-29 b8d2ec920f: Revert "Improve last change to xfaces.c" (05ece1eb8b) Date: Mon, 12 Dec 2022 19:08:55 +0800 Message-ID: <878rjcj2uw.fsf@yahoo.com> References: <167080778504.14972.16819452979975432761@vcs2.savannah.gnu.org> <20221212011625.58E8AC004B4@vcs2.savannah.gnu.org> <877cyxjqd8.fsf@yahoo.com> <87359ljq04.fsf@yahoo.com> <87tu21hr7m.fsf@yahoo.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="2771"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Gregory Heytings Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Mon Dec 12 12:09:22 2022 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 1p4ggS-0000TG-M5 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Mon, 12 Dec 2022 12:09:20 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1p4ggI-0001mB-8j; Mon, 12 Dec 2022 06:09:10 -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 1p4ggG-0001jO-8m for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 12 Dec 2022 06:09:08 -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 1p4ggE-000695-3j for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 12 Dec 2022 06:09:07 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yahoo.com; s=s2048; t=1670843343; bh=OvPOn/0vZ+YNNbD7GkTZf1MVor1Wg5jSJrPaD3u3ErQ=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:From:Subject:Reply-To; b=DBhM9TFXO3cLdUma9ZVoBLBctJPx9TwCSYdnwtbd5h33etQw5RWeeOYhAfijRqWTcUhROv3d0bwQxgVM8Kl3K/LphGy2347nEfmk/nJsAWzBt0pN1eI6VCdfFzepjPEMr9fX6S1uSfvDBYzkeyCAoa7tRUsZaDlGbhdu4LYPnhEkKyhRhNcIZAtcUFcukbrERHebaeI1T8soOtRzARxmDh9/6TvXQqx3CW9/uf8rWZs/D+ZFuFIeJLfp7WJroz9rpdDi+b75u57mCtKczD8olnj29L6KCfSWIzk9slvFq3Uk6qO3beSGe9V0xaGPKTJDzRqGoLLRc0hCzuujfbBxiA== X-SONIC-DKIM-SIGN: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yahoo.com; s=s2048; t=1670843343; bh=lOhRoh9XPehsz0S8r2ntH/oMcr/+br1HtZthMOS9IhD=; h=X-Sonic-MF:From:To:Subject:Date:From:Subject; b=nWc0X/zylOHuiQGj695xdrtnRnLzVslIYFExv52THajgHxhHTSRxop/nQY1hOdkoJEuWDB7QYmFMjtICo5cQrpiDFyFgjw/hD8rNEcsDDbQ3SwH8Y/iHqHXpXaqv4HIJAHzCIOanexntzoARwM6ZcrrAQcnyfgct3z1YNNy0/Tns22ZctZYAgfuB6ZMp8n1Yssa6YNhtqqUHBWqWlasjX7nhn+AsdIzcx2JqM7UZZnA5leOgBk9YcNyOOCRndiFiVMXoYxN5M3rDSnBEHuD2IFUpyzfi8Yx2zfnarW7h6TYDA6x7WQaGEy/Udxks+bYeET3zvwMy1K1kHT9Jjaw7Qw== X-YMail-OSG: NZq3ZJUVM1k675qlP5S1H1bxXutJwt7f4o_CTY47Vu22K_qte9V_tZFGM8c8E3x dhw5RtP.GN8zLQkq9xu6GwgsF6QbeLDVzJm0LMaaQ5ZPI3ycThdZNljgoXXPXrq6VKL1KLT1Q1tR 1DQw5zKOpgncoAbceDIiGrOlrT2_K6G_muMiSHHz.RKaJ86qP03AH4VgUSMzL5.gASfWeSsf37G9 fFPhehta7yWepCibLyGb08laZYQqYuk.UYpSxuTLf6Eq_SPMIubm0_GRx8Sw5NGhN9_zXT.63dT7 Y5SPCARk2fVoMz4e97vzB81tkPKaU3Z7RCj_cvMVZXwFvy1zJwXZGSoB1k7omnEcxOl2ctSZoaSO s6fJedjoJzQA7MCeAMl_stGOu_l7l52u3n5E3pJ4BY4wCnpITRunIMAhTqaHv.2.1tmAC7ZnMx8b LP8VlBfJ2d4G7oi5rrvarwN.qej4UxspqcHvVaLCb3EHNx4znNgDZ4kN6k0x.tB9jlc0lC95cgAN Byuky0mmqbS8A0gsW9cK_h8H1Q2cPDJiEMiBX7tzYu.lNNyA2tCHVg8UcNwLKlM2k76BhUVkRW11 fcZuxpxHR_RKghkXoCwop0RNj.q9LutgdHXeR1l.Ng9ti9.eq640fBpPZ1v_A7bnYCnZAPeUmxUF Hl.PSjsMYrsl.h.3I8mM4PTjpaQpLzP740UZoJbSFlh.p5.bO.vdhEv4bNurgwMAH4n9vXT.kfUf tbxlLL5BSwCfYF1hHwgAe1dTGtk4nF66PLcWRYzw2mYNedDpTqZ2AskGztmGK1333v3ZBgeipQOG STIskECrdKt0mpAsV8oOyOPv4BbyxumCCy49q8A__C X-Sonic-MF: Original-Received: from sonic.gate.mail.ne1.yahoo.com by sonic309.consmr.mail.ne1.yahoo.com with HTTP; Mon, 12 Dec 2022 11:09:03 +0000 Original-Received: by hermes--production-sg3-b666c6484-75xgb (Yahoo Inc. Hermes SMTP Server) with ESMTPA ID 9e06bfa49b8b679949d4c7efcd310fac; Mon, 12 Dec 2022 11:09:00 +0000 (UTC) In-Reply-To: (Gregory Heytings's message of "Mon, 12 Dec 2022 10:42:17 +0000") X-Mailer: WebService/1.1.20926 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, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 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:301215 Archived-At: Gregory Heytings writes: > It is telling that you "see no purpose" in discussing a change to code > that was agreed upon after 300 posts in a bug report. Sorry, but I don't see where in the discussion the use of a bitmask as a variable was actually discussed. My change does not touch any of the code which was discussed. > That variable is of no interest whatsoever to our users. It is there > only for debugging purposes, and is once again only meant to be used > by the few users who understand subtle technicalities in the face > realization code. Then the best course of action is to just remove the variable. > Aha. That's your understanding of a "discussion", then: you say > something, and act immediately, without waiting for a potential > answer. And then claim that there was a "discussion" because you said > something. Oh, in fact no, that's not even what happened: you reverted > before saying anything. Only because you reverted first. > You would not ask that question if you had read the explanation in > https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=59347#331. And the fact > you ask that question shows that you did not read it. Anyway, AFAIK :font can be a font-entity and not a font-spec, in which case it is definitely not okay to touch :extra under the Haiku font backend: it contains two indices into the system-wide font and family arrays which should not be changed. > The relevant parts of that enum have not changed at all since they > were introduced fifteen years ago. And will you guarantee that will always be the case? > Nobody should do that. The docstring clearly said: "There is no > reason to change that value except for debugging purposes." Alas, what ``should'' be is very different from reality. Someone will set the unused bits to random garbage, and someone elses nice plan for adding extra fields to a font object will be broken by that change. > Oh yes, I see. FONT_SPEC_MAX is (and has always been) 15, but > clearly, for a reason that hasn't happened in the past fifteen years, > "at some point in the future", it will become 30, and that will be > problematic on 32-bit computers. And you tell me that what I write is > "nonsense". It could change, and once it does I can almost guarantee that nobody will think to update the ``obscure'' bitmask exposed to Lisp that users ``are not supposed'' to set. > Anyway, I don't want to deal with this anymore. I probably spent > about 50 hours on that bug, that's more than enough. Fair enough.