From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: =?utf-8?Q?=C3=93scar_Fuentes?= Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Development Speed Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2021 11:09:09 +0100 Message-ID: <87sfulx86y.fsf@telefonica.net> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="14707"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/29.0.50 (gnu/linux) To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Cancel-Lock: sha1:7TytAfkGIGShjo/cZwZUnDnC3MM= Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Wed Dec 22 11:10:43 2021 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 1mzya3-0003ck-88 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Wed, 22 Dec 2021 11:10:43 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:37738 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mzya1-0001fQ-IT for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Wed, 22 Dec 2021 05:10:41 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:54944) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mzyZ0-0000Sh-9s for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 22 Dec 2021 05:09:38 -0500 Original-Received: from ciao.gmane.io ([116.202.254.214]:42478) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mzyYl-00051d-Ah for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 22 Dec 2021 05:09:35 -0500 Original-Received: from list by ciao.gmane.io with local (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1mzyYg-0001vV-F7 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 22 Dec 2021 11:09:18 +0100 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ Received-SPF: pass client-ip=116.202.254.214; envelope-from=ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; helo=ciao.gmane.io X-Spam_score_int: -15 X-Spam_score: -1.6 X-Spam_bar: - X-Spam_report: (-1.6 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.25, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=no 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" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:282701 Archived-At: Richard Stallman writes: > > I cannot see the future or what could've been, this is highly opinionated > > but I do believe following latest C standard as early as possible is good > > for an ... > > As has been pointed out, we support lots of platforms, including old > platforms, and some of them don't have fresh new compilers. If we > wanted to be quick to tell users "tough, your platform is no longer > supported," we could assume everyone has the latest GCC to use. This is not about having the latest GCC, this is about having a GCC that's less than 10 years old. > But those platforms are important. > > Some of those old platforms are among the most important ones > because they allow operation without the Intel Management Engine > (or AMD's counterpart to that). Aren't there modern machines without this? Machines that are much more performant, reliable and secure than those old ones, which usually are tied to an unsupported OS full of security defects? I sincerely don't get the stance of clinging to decades-old software and hardware but when it comes to Emacs it must be the latest and shiniest. As if emacs version N would cease to work the very moment emacs version N+1 is released. Have we checked lately if those machines that we purport to support are able to run anything more complex than `emacs -Q'? > Our principles say we must do our best to encourage people to use a > free compiler if that is at all possible. If the only C17 compiler > for a platform is nonfree, we must support using GCC instead. Nobody suggested using anything else than GCC. I'm having the feeling that a good chunk of participants on this ml are unwittingly but firmly commited to confine Emacs to the same retro-computing world they live in. The amount of tension and obstructionism that emerges every time that someone suggests implementing some technology less than 20 years old is overwhelming.