From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Oleh Krehel Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Is it time to remove INTERNAL_FIELD? Date: Tue, 28 Apr 2015 17:11:58 +0200 Message-ID: <87wq0wmgn5.fsf@gmail.com> References: <87lhhjuq26.fsf@gmail.com> <5538C48F.2020005@cs.ucla.edu> <87fv7rupcc.fsf@gmail.com> <5538C6C0.2000609@cs.ucla.edu> <83sibr15ac.fsf@gnu.org> <878udjun89.fsf@gmail.com> <83pp6v14cy.fsf@gnu.org> <87sibr84hb.fsf@gmail.com> <83oamf12ax.fsf@gnu.org> <87fv7rqcc7.fsf@gmail.com> <83lhhj10mb.fsf@gnu.org> <877ft0fpax.fsf@gmail.com> <83oamcxx99.fsf@gnu.org> <83k2x0xobm.fsf@gnu.org> <87d22oem75.fsf@gmail.com> <83vbgguw9j.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1430236284 16503 80.91.229.3 (28 Apr 2015 15:51:24 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 28 Apr 2015 15:51:24 +0000 (UTC) Cc: eggert@cs.ucla.edu, monnier@IRO.UMontreal.CA, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Apr 28 17:51:24 2015 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 1Yn7n1-0006I2-Gf for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 28 Apr 2015 17:51:16 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:34602 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Yn7n0-0002Wd-Pr for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 28 Apr 2015 11:51:14 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:46958) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Yn7Gj-0004Id-QC for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 28 Apr 2015 11:17:54 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Yn7Gh-00088c-2q for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 28 Apr 2015 11:17:53 -0400 Original-Received: from mail-wi0-x22f.google.com ([2a00:1450:400c:c05::22f]:36131) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Yn7Gg-00088Y-TD; Tue, 28 Apr 2015 11:17:51 -0400 Original-Received: by wizk4 with SMTP id k4so144896776wiz.1; Tue, 28 Apr 2015 08:17:50 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=from:to:cc:subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id :user-agent:mime-version:content-type; bh=5B0tHyHIaietm9NFN2nLuz9chx//5AhxfYxypZGnRZI=; b=Noue+0hkN+f53TbgGSnhGtUirK7PTYj/U5UUVoLPvXahtAy3tAxvvOHzcaz7/aMz0j x/wTQq53GlFlALvvYIWNrRde87o97iaMYDwgn9goY9m8OSAr6lSH2R9eUeXgozN+PQPK ndytCKjFRsEELEULAKKu2Q4xkDF9YpAyNLWk/dnLtnX9IkGk+WavSgG/EOa9sKf7WJBO VJmsYxbEjMjA6HtCUD8Xj461EacdsBV35oXPqhLPCc9MIz1LqkWNSJ7RVYua4dsMXVS5 eC/q9h2ao+AKC8ZnLOs+e3r5adWNurBrUaEMQ19OrwyOIveL+XtwbB1HSaeLCvDm56An K/Cg== X-Received: by 10.194.122.105 with SMTP id lr9mr33973880wjb.153.1430234270418; Tue, 28 Apr 2015 08:17:50 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: from firefly (dyn069045.nbw.tue.nl. [131.155.69.45]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id dq4sm16860056wid.17.2015.04.28.08.17.49 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Tue, 28 Apr 2015 08:17:49 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <83vbgguw9j.fsf@gnu.org> (Eli Zaretskii's message of "Tue, 28 Apr 2015 18:07:20 +0300") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/25.0.50 (gnu/linux) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Error: Malformed IPv6 address (bad octet value). X-Received-From: 2a00:1450:400c:c05::22f 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:185968 Archived-At: Eli Zaretskii writes: >> From: Oleh Krehel >> Cc: Stefan Monnier , eggert@cs.ucla.edu, emacs-devel@gnu.org >> Date: Tue, 28 Apr 2015 09:39:10 +0200 >> >> > Unless the concurrency branch is officially and finally dead, I'd like >> > to keep the underscores, to make it easier to revive that branch, if >> > and when some volunteer emerges. >> >> I think that a good start towards concurrency is making the code as >> simple as possible. Removing INTERNAL_FIELD is a tiny step towards that >> goal. > > I'm not against removing INTERNAL_FIELD. I was only talking about > keeping the code that appends the underscores to fields in buffer and > keyboard structures where we were doing that with INTERNAL_FIELD. > >> Perhaps, removing some other abstraction mechanisms that don't actually >> do anything yet (but potentially could be useful in the future) would >> also be good. Concurrency would come with its own abstractions, I think >> the old ones would just get in the way. > > We append the underscores not as some abstraction, but as an aid to > catch early code that will interfere with merging the concurrency > branch. > >> Should I update the patch to include the underscores everywhere? > > Not everywhere, only where the fields are used in BVAR and KVAR. So that means everywhere, except allow to use BVAR and KVAR macros without an underscore. Did I understand correctly? Oleh