From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.ciao.gmane.io!not-for-mail From: Dmitry Gutov Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: PL support Date: Sat, 9 May 2020 22:20:25 +0300 Message-ID: <91ae82cf-a03b-1a49-0ffd-8ff56e4c0ca8@yandex.ru> References: <9mmFgzvrBwjt_n_VJyaJdXINraNi5HsGpwq-0MLeKiJA7kG2BQA4uywrzjyz7lpRS0OZDpjEi8lspOKYUA7P_QsODsDew_8nbH960G55fmY=@protonmail.com> <83imh5hby1.fsf@gnu.org> <2e4e8ce9-d857-f3e3-31cf-a40dee67bd25@yandex.ru> <83y2q1dsvh.fsf@gnu.org> <2468efa6-7dbd-8634-44cc-586bb6985f49@yandex.ru> <83pnbddrfd.fsf@gnu.org> <83k11ldpxs.fsf@gnu.org> <83imh5dnun.fsf@gnu.org> <83h7wpdms7.fsf@gnu.org> <88771DA6-67FA-48E6-A7F4-CC0B1E17832B@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="ciao.gmane.io:159.69.161.202"; logging-data="127110"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.7.0 Cc: Yuan Fu , Eli Zaretskii , Stefan Monnier , emacs-devel To: =?UTF-8?B?Sm/Do28gVMOhdm9yYQ==?= Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Sat May 09 21:21:02 2020 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 1jXV1y-000Wyu-Rw for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Sat, 09 May 2020 21:21:02 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:55114 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jXV1x-0001ME-Pg for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Sat, 09 May 2020 15:21:01 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:47378) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jXV1S-0000vK-Rq for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 09 May 2020 15:20:30 -0400 Original-Received: from mail-wr1-x443.google.com ([2a00:1450:4864:20::443]:38778) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jXV1R-0005OV-OO; Sat, 09 May 2020 15:20:30 -0400 Original-Received: by mail-wr1-x443.google.com with SMTP id x17so5890586wrt.5; Sat, 09 May 2020 12:20:28 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=sender:subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language:content-transfer-encoding; bh=dSAC3n9cYsagHIHvISmpMUoDEtAS092izRSR17XsHsg=; b=ZSxfgsI9e/DjPn1xJm3nOWnQrWdhHsYB0EH/jjx32C/7g3il1oVo3lku6P7afz84bR QarcLlZPggjrPIp8QhncFZOUBvdMxaVljitO8t9bkF8GxswqaxeCKgDM42AmFZNvQwxD kSzV1pqtd5quJEQUcPbUJVXtayXH1SVLQGvrIu95GXeKRzDFOHcYrPLS4AvLVjHyv832 syMNW08QiPo8KzEhz6I4sDkfPxUJJsIDK/5sdYYASW6x/nMRNbMpqDqCl0vuKme7896e X60yG+dJBA88zygvr5FhEO4vB0LYRP2qdzlEl/Wf3Rt4J0FofE6P5zst2LM5sBoq4AEO 3ZZw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:sender:subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id :date:user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language :content-transfer-encoding; bh=dSAC3n9cYsagHIHvISmpMUoDEtAS092izRSR17XsHsg=; b=ia6MpLTRINGNlrWyqQV+aaLJcuOUqtnH+hN2RHmf6ZQEYg0gJLsa9Q8BsmVZFO7UBe Xo5r2aQUSgm9o51i2D5EWPnzZHbDfhthungqBQr2a+/3aKQokL2MkYQijw65fE9XADc6 lt38Sf0/ZOJRhaZ8Jm1u46JPFCLgtFaVBrHIEXVoKBwnKef82Xc/bdh0ytTH75UT6RmS IDxkGSqvajDgBjC3GCn8jo++ZVE0eKz/37/esqXGC8qCyKrFw3cT7IhTyZDIaRwkqGOA ukqGayL64QuTlW7CsAM9NWqkEFc7fq02zFoyHfqbhtMxZWgxs7OHnJ7X/LIpnLAWUxZ7 yzsg== X-Gm-Message-State: AGi0PuY7nl+3CaFnhR530vR56zZOA9p/UapaYhg9hdzsmDuZa4afHzRv LYuVMX9kiuId2dsaIqvoO9A= X-Google-Smtp-Source: APiQypJEs/mgxhf80Oo6HII5g3LYJJgOI6d0POYfao9CUbhKXF13+v+dK2aUeo7Yy7D1rV62du6fwg== X-Received: by 2002:adf:97de:: with SMTP id t30mr9935804wrb.135.1589052027628; Sat, 09 May 2020 12:20:27 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: from [192.168.0.3] ([66.205.73.129]) by smtp.googlemail.com with ESMTPSA id a13sm9213141wrv.67.2020.05.09.12.20.26 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Sat, 09 May 2020 12:20:27 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: Content-Language: en-US Received-SPF: pass client-ip=2a00:1450:4864:20::443; envelope-from=raaahh@gmail.com; helo=mail-wr1-x443.google.com X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: No matching host in p0f cache. That's all we know. X-Spam_score_int: -16 X-Spam_score: -1.7 X-Spam_bar: - X-Spam_report: (-1.7 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN=0.001, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.249, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001 autolearn=_AUTOLEARN X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 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:249557 Archived-At: On 09.05.2020 21:56, João Távora wrote: > On Sat, May 9, 2020 at 7:44 PM Dmitry Gutov wrote: > >> How would that help? Eldoc has a defined interface. If eglot-box could >> be based on that, it could just be considered for contribution on its own. > > A pretty bad one, as we know. So? Make it better. Having Eglot in there wouldn't help, since you have to improve the interface while keeping in mind *all* possible uses, existing ones and potential future ones. > It's much better do deal with it in one > place, Emacs, rather then the user complaining to Eglot issue tracker > then I have to explain the problem or desired feature is in eldoc, > then agree on an interface betweent he two files. In Emacs I just > submit a patch to both files and both maintainers look at it. You would submit a patch for eldoc.el with a short description why it's an improvement, and that's that. Maybe link to the original report. The first step would be necessary anyway, as a part of the bug report discussion. It's not like we never have long, unproductive discussions in bug reports here. > Rather what I find hard to follow is the "not in core" stance. It seems > like you want to protect lsp-mode mode, or not condemn it to > irrelevance. That's some part of it, but I'm more on the side of "lean core, rich set of plugins" approach to Emacs architecture. So I'd rather move more stuff out than add to it. Also I hate mistargeted solutions: this discussion came out of "how make Emacs more popular" discussion, right? Initial user experience, etc. And such a move will do little to help either.