Re: Code for cond*

[Po Lu <luangruo@yahoo.com>]

Emanuel Berg <incal@dataswamp.org> writes:

> If a consensus cannot be reached, obey tradition.
>
> And don't say your proposed, untested solution should replace
> something that has been operational for over a decade and is
> used even as we speak.
>
> What you can say is "Hey, we have something interesting here,
> take a look, hopefully it will gain traction if people are
> appealed by it".
>
> But you are not saying that because you yourself are not
> confident cond* really has any such advantages over `pcase' to
> motivate anything close to this kind of
> confrontational approach.

I can't so much as understand pcase forms, let alone debate the fine
technical details that certain participants in this thread insist
demonstrate the superiority of pcase over cond*.  That is a glaring
problem in its own right!

But if you read my words carefully, it will be apparent that all I have
asked is that people refrain from contriving reasons to exclude cond*
from Emacs.  Richard already made up his mind, yet with the perplexing
and disproportionate flurry of hostility which has been provoked, all
that now hangs in the balance.