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: Emacs contributions, C and Lisp Date: Tue, 04 Mar 2014 21:29:48 +0100 Organization: Organization?!? Message-ID: <87k3c9hflv.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> References: <837g8t8ouc.fsf@gnu.org> <20140219080524.25689b6b@forcix.jorgenschaefer.de> <83k3cr58o2.fsf@gnu.org> <530BAEE5.9040004@online.de> <87ppmatkpe.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> <87wqgfsxsr.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> <87wqgf37n4.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> <87ha7gshu9.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> <871tyko9l5.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> <87eh2ks897.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> <87fvn0mk25.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> <87bnxorlol.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> <877g8bmxal.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> <877g8asfl0.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> <8738iyjrl3.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> <87mwh5ridq.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> <87wqg9hn10.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> <878uspaku2.fsf@wanadoo.es> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1393965015 12383 80.91.229.3 (4 Mar 2014 20:30:15 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 4 Mar 2014 20:30:15 +0000 (UTC) To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Mar 04 21:30:24 2014 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1WKvyo-00086O-RK for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 04 Mar 2014 21:30:22 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:48416 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WKvyo-0006hS-EU for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 04 Mar 2014 15:30:22 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:55272) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WKvyg-0006cZ-7t for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 04 Mar 2014 15:30:19 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WKvya-0000YY-V0 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 04 Mar 2014 15:30:14 -0500 Original-Received: from plane.gmane.org ([80.91.229.3]:60493) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WKvya-0000WC-Ow for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 04 Mar 2014 15:30:08 -0500 Original-Received: from list by plane.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1WKvyR-0007oJ-KV for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 04 Mar 2014 21:29:59 +0100 Original-Received: from x2f42c08.dyn.telefonica.de ([2.244.44.8]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Tue, 04 Mar 2014 21:29:59 +0100 Original-Received: from dak by x2f42c08.dyn.telefonica.de with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Tue, 04 Mar 2014 21:29:59 +0100 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ Original-Lines: 44 Original-X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: x2f42c08.dyn.telefonica.de X-Face: 2FEFf>]>q>2iw=B6, xrUubRI>pR&Ml9=ao@P@i)L:\urd*t9M~y1^:+Y]'C0~{mAl`oQuAl \!3KEIp?*w`|bL5qr,H)LFO6Q=qx~iH4DN; i"; /yuIsqbLLCh/!U#X[S~(5eZ41to5f%E@'ELIi$t^ Vc\LWP@J5p^rst0+('>Er0=^1{]M9!p?&:\z]|;&=NP3AhB!B_bi^]Pfkw User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.3.50 (gnu/linux) Cancel-Lock: sha1:AfNkOuYmWyP1bUmXQL3FohlGpj0= X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. X-Received-From: 80.91.229.3 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 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.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:170145 Archived-At: Óscar Fuentes writes: > David Kastrup writes: > > [snip] > >>> In any case, Richard's argument nowhere depends on *exclusive* use of >>> Clang. He simply doesn't want unique features of Clang supported, no >>> matter how good Emacs's support for GCC is. >> >> Sigh. I don't know _how_ often I have to repeat this. The problem is >> not "supporting features of Clang", the problem is _requiring_ features >> of Clang for supporting features of Emacs. >> >> We don't want Emacs features that _depend_ on Clang. > > It's clear that that is not RMS intention. Otherwise, for the specific > case of C++ smart completion, CEDET could default to its own parser and > provide Clang as an option. That would be native-parser supported editing _only_ for Clang, not for GCC. > But that's not allowed by RMS. He doesn't want Clang on Emacs unless > *GCC* provides the same features. Which is an unfair scenario for GCC > because, contrary to Clang, it wasn't intended to provide those > features, and past attempts to steer its development towards those > goals were rejected by the same person who now spurs them to match > Clang's library-like features :-/ He doesn't spur them to match "library-like features". At the moment smart completion is what is involved here specifically. That's quite not the same. Personally I think that the time delay associated with adding features individually is prohibitively large. But it's impossible to get things in perspective if everybody insists on misrepresenting Richard and ascribing absurdities to him. If you refuse to see the issues that are to be balanced, you can't complain when your input on choosing the balance is discarded as worthless. -- David Kastrup