From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Artur Malabarba Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Emacs rewrite in a maintainable language Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2015 16:21:58 +0100 Message-ID: References: <561A19AB.5060001@cumego.com> <87io6dl0h0.fsf@wanadoo.es> <87lhb82qxc.fsf@gmail.com> <878u78b3hg.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> <87h9lwyv33.fsf@gmail.com> <561C368F.6010306@cs.ucla.edu> <87oag3xb2i.fsf@gmail.com> <20151013114630.GA4613@acm.fritz.box> <87io6bou1j.fsf@gmail.com> <874mhu96jh.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> Reply-To: bruce.connor.am@gmail.com NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1444749789 12460 80.91.229.3 (13 Oct 2015 15:23:09 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2015 15:23:09 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Sergey Organov , emacs-devel To: David Kastrup Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Oct 13 17:23:09 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 1Zm1Pv-0006Uy-2N for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 13 Oct 2015 17:23:07 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:36818 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Zm1Pu-0006Zy-4P for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 13 Oct 2015 11:23:06 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:44089) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Zm1Ov-0005Vp-KN for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 13 Oct 2015 11:22:09 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Zm1Os-0002oX-Jf for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 13 Oct 2015 11:22:03 -0400 Original-Received: from mail-lb0-x22f.google.com ([2a00:1450:4010:c04::22f]:34782) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Zm1Op-0002nG-Uh; Tue, 13 Oct 2015 11:22:00 -0400 Original-Received: by lbbck17 with SMTP id ck17so24710830lbb.1; Tue, 13 Oct 2015 08:21:59 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:reply-to:sender:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id :subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=iOFi7pIWZ3peo3wPuPuuRY8jKMGCmsSdXy+l/Vkcqio=; b=NIPXA+Kv9XzgV6qgHJY8SRRbrh22A40X14Mrw7FQGtnZa2lKNjqWV8Hdt7e0aTNXwU 31FL95h/IvEAitDd3VNOuZAsUTNxwMFeVsDALrZWPVZHALlysXOme9rdUCzL/TzXJOEB 3aZSgwc1mkssBPWDYNurEqtYaajh7V3iF1E5fzb2Jz+GAmRjy/CjdQCdrVcVYuX/6r93 BvUi8TudGOUd+6cfCLyAvSDFusiAW51NlcEMm3d+0Scy9RCWCvAcDpMAsqtj9T2gTjOL Q44VQzrSMBByC33fonlcgBADgYft8hhCtLLxxuN6e2eh1Q87v9DICQyy3SJOWqIAQ9nw M2rg== X-Received: by 10.112.63.135 with SMTP id g7mr15471558lbs.16.1444749719051; Tue, 13 Oct 2015 08:21:59 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: by 10.25.27.78 with HTTP; Tue, 13 Oct 2015 08:21:58 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <874mhu96jh.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> X-Google-Sender-Auth: JTxErHlDwAElrgH9hvaVxSH7mHM X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Error: Malformed IPv6 address (bad octet value). X-Received-From: 2a00:1450:4010:c04::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:191477 Archived-At: 2015-10-13 15:39 GMT+01:00 David Kastrup : > Artur Malabarba writes: > >> On 13 Oct 2015 2:06 pm, "Sergey Organov" wrote: >>> Dunno if enforcing one form or another makes sense. >> >> It makes sense to prevent inconsistencies and confusion of new >> contributors (specially at almost zero cost). > > Well, people who cannot figure out that "const char" and "char const" > are the same are not likely to find their way across our code base. At > any rate, "const" in C is nuisance-only and not meaning-conveying like > in C++ where it may take part in disambiguation as well as semantics > (copy constructor calls behave specially and are very much const &). > > So the "confusion" here is restricted to "oh, the compiler does not > complain?". No, the confusion is "which one of these does what I want?". I can perfectly figure the answer to that question on my own by googling (which is "either"). That doesn't mean it's a good thing. It's yet another small obstacle/time-waste/distraction I would have to overcome. The point is not that people can't figure it out. The point is that the fewer useless things to figure out, the better.