From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: =?utf-8?Q?=C3=93scar_Fuentes?= Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.help Subject: Re: Is Elisp really that slow? Date: Wed, 15 May 2019 15:25:04 +0200 Message-ID: <87woirsvdb.fsf@telefonica.net> References: <20190514235412.kncazq45szlum2gr@Ergus> <46f308ff-5a70-8ccc-310b-48167088ff5a@yandex.ru> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: blaine.gmane.org; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:195.159.176.226"; logging-data="96063"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@blaine.gmane.org" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.0.50 (gnu/linux) To: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Original-X-From: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed May 15 15:25:32 2019 Return-path: Envelope-to: geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1hQtuT-000OrK-2i for geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Wed, 15 May 2019 15:25:29 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:37204 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1hQtuR-0003qI-UR for geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Wed, 15 May 2019 09:25:27 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:48208) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1hQtuH-0003px-SR for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 15 May 2019 09:25:18 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1hQtuG-0007Kv-SU for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 15 May 2019 09:25:17 -0400 Original-Received: from [195.159.176.226] (port=40622 helo=blaine.gmane.org) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1hQtuG-0007HG-M0 for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 15 May 2019 09:25:16 -0400 Original-Received: from list by blaine.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1hQtuC-000OUI-D2 for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 15 May 2019 15:25:12 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ Cancel-Lock: sha1:zyjMgLta/dvTB6LED4pJ04VPmSg= X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 195.159.176.226 X-BeenThere: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: Users list for the GNU Emacs text editor List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "help-gnu-emacs" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.help:120380 Archived-At: Dmitry Gutov writes: > On 15.05.2019 2:54, Ergus wrote: >> To mention just one example: It does not make sense that C-c C-c >> comments the current lines in C-mode, but sends the current sexep to >> terminal in other modes, or send the messages in others. > > Indeed. > > Maybe you should submit a bug report about that (or see if one is > already open). As C-Mode has no associated terminal nor it composes messages, the request would amount to "unbind C-c C-c", something no current or future C/C++ user would benefit from. OTOH C-Mode supports M-; (comment-dwim) which is an standard method of (un)commenting code in Emacs. Pretending that every mode conforms to the same rules is counterproductive, because there are vast differences among them. We shall strive for pragmatism, not for bureaucracy.