From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Miles Bader Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Should `cancel-timer' use `delete' instead of `delq'? Date: Wed, 06 Sep 2006 10:11:56 +0900 Message-ID: <87k64hiysj.fsf@catnip.gol.com> References: Reply-To: Miles Bader NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1157505149 5077 80.91.229.2 (6 Sep 2006 01:12:29 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 6 Sep 2006 01:12:29 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Sep 06 03:12:27 2006 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GKlxm-0001Hi-NZ for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 06 Sep 2006 03:12:23 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GKlxl-0007zY-S7 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 05 Sep 2006 21:12:21 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1GKlxa-0007zI-7G for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 05 Sep 2006 21:12:10 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1GKlxY-0007z3-28 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 05 Sep 2006 21:12:09 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GKlxX-0007yz-SZ for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 05 Sep 2006 21:12:07 -0400 Original-Received: from [203.216.5.72] (helo=smtp02.dentaku.gol.com) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA:32) (Exim 4.52) id 1GKlxY-0007ps-3v; Tue, 05 Sep 2006 21:12:08 -0400 Original-Received: from 203-216-98-149.dsl.gol.ne.jp ([203.216.98.149] helo=catnip.gol.com) by smtp02.dentaku.gol.com with esmtpa (Dentaku) id 1GKlxS-0001oa-K6; Wed, 06 Sep 2006 10:12:02 +0900 Original-Received: by catnip.gol.com (Postfix, from userid 1000) id D75C02F4D; Wed, 6 Sep 2006 10:11:56 +0900 (JST) Original-To: "Drew Adams" System-Type: i686-pc-linux-gnu In-Reply-To: (Drew Adams's message of "Tue, 5 Sep 2006 14:24:08 -0700") Original-Lines: 25 X-Abuse-Complaints: abuse@gol.com X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:59407 Archived-At: "Drew Adams" writes: > To repeat my question: Is it a good idea to either document the > "traditional" `define-minor-mode' approach or define a new macro for this, > or should we just let people discover this on their own? I think the macro is inappropriate; the problem generally doesn't occur in typical "define" contexts (for instance your defvar "protection" will never get executed, because of the way defvar works). If this is actually a problem in practice, just documenting it seems good enough. Is this potential problem really any more widespread than millions of other very similar bugs though? This is exactly the same as many other sorts of resource allocation/deallocation; we don't explicitly warn people about each of them because we assume than programmers know how to handle this sort of thing in general. -Miles -- "Unless there are slaves to do the ugly, horrible, uninteresting work, culture and contemplation become almost impossible. Human slavery is wrong, insecure, and demoralizing. On mechanical slavery, on the slavery of the machine, the future of the world depends." -Oscar Wilde, "The Soul of Man Under Socialism"