From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Kaushal Modi Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] RFC: eldoc-documentation-functions hook Date: Thu, 07 Jul 2016 10:02:11 +0000 Message-ID: References: <20160612061229.GA6463@holos.localdomain> <838tyahoim.fsf@gnu.org> <20160612182453.GA12034@holos.localdomain> <20160613211735.GA5969@holos.localdomain> <20160617210849.GA3775@holos.localdomain> <20160707033019.GA22360@holos.localdomain> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a113dd64a38e273053708c8ad X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1467885789 23609 80.91.229.3 (7 Jul 2016 10:03:09 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 7 Jul 2016 10:03:09 +0000 (UTC) To: Leo Liu , Emacs developers , Mark Oteiza Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu Jul 07 12:03:08 2016 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 1bL69E-0007b1-4e for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 07 Jul 2016 12:03:08 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:38563 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bL69C-0002XT-0w for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 07 Jul 2016 06:03:06 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:44127) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bL68V-0002XM-VS for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 07 Jul 2016 06:02:24 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bL68V-0002gi-3d for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 07 Jul 2016 06:02:23 -0400 Original-Received: from mail-oi0-x244.google.com ([2607:f8b0:4003:c06::244]:36441) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bL68U-0002gS-Ty for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 07 Jul 2016 06:02:23 -0400 Original-Received: by mail-oi0-x244.google.com with SMTP id j134so1022617oib.3 for ; Thu, 07 Jul 2016 03:02:22 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=oX40wmzzIp2H5NUiN/Bv2Vduecxz95IymnctWRjbOZs=; b=srcKcVh4os3hO79z15MUwDVCatPN4uL8sxxl8S5OeV3A3sWCIpIWqIYwf0EypZli3/ syDqQYpQuOLBkv661Cggrs0YJgjUBzG643xuP0GkPQyCgnCge932hPAyFCglLlrhSBWZ /BD0FaCTL9UkiaJrRzPOcvTPeGWbpOgg+u8FMrsGxoWy/oveo/PPgJbcBPj6EZebuCzA wboh94Y7GSNW/72YMdcwpBREeCXhwvGm/ISjnLsCEysuyaIsNDFIaWpHQRnkNWm5LFWO bZBDduVC7U/LeSgnA9OO5qXbs+tk6FSPu5mlPo3zE01yzDdYgAEF/CKpt0FwomntEThy G81w== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to; bh=oX40wmzzIp2H5NUiN/Bv2Vduecxz95IymnctWRjbOZs=; b=No7lpIl0orelNgKKfHdsZyh/rnKJU7na0HHoWVFCb++lNpmFIZyCiCFNNIljVmpPKd ngcRBfWFj9+iJ4FmZRBCfDulTiJ1VYyb7StFmPzWb2ScEm4eOT7OHyOVtoSYpJDxIVdB rU7qwIAJ1DUuoX42klr9J7WYhoo+Jf7RVc/rNU+KYmAr+i8sJAQVm4/94xkXJXFzT9SG oSelobVlytf+YfHIkWKFkM8/D823K7TnQbVgO5JwzVrEProDUoZRYoJj6VEiTK9eDVxG vBDFbDXoPW2B6B8f0KBaFprpv+B1XdELBv65PzQZ9vHhc2SkopXIBHWVzL1gnTrDCcOu HPFQ== X-Gm-Message-State: ALyK8tJb2PekfbmwyRhdoW3VfRcORLHzon/lRoA48TWxEGtoRoqZ3omIgmUDKoIoVDOn9Dm/2W8b0KUxarGeWw== X-Received: by 10.202.207.81 with SMTP id f78mr558398oig.52.1467885741988; Thu, 07 Jul 2016 03:02:21 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 2607:f8b0:4003:c06::244 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 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" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:205308 Archived-At: --001a113dd64a38e273053708c8ad Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 I'm neither for or against this change. But if this change is done in eldoc.el, then shouldn't the add-function to add-hook change be done in all the major modes too? Like in elisp-mode.el, etc. On Thu, Jul 7, 2016, 12:12 AM Leo Liu wrote: > On 2016-07-06 23:30 -0400, Mark Oteiza wrote: > > Applied with some wording changes as 5811404 > > I don't think we have reached any consensus. There are legitimate > concerns that this introduces incompatibility. Please give better > explanation why reverting a decision made by ex-maintainer. > > Cheers, > Leo > > > -- -- Kaushal Modi --001a113dd64a38e273053708c8ad Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I'm neither for or against this change. But if this change is done in e= ldoc.el, then shouldn't the add-function to add-hook change be done in = all the major modes too? Like in elisp-mode.el, etc.=C2=A0

On Thu, Jul 7, 2016, 12:12 AM Leo Liu &l= t;sdl.web@gmail.com> wrote:
=
On 2016-07-06 23:30 -0400, Mark Oteiza= wrote:
> Applied with some wording changes as 5811404

I don't think we have reached any consensus. There are legitimate
concerns that this introduces incompatibility. Please give better
explanation why reverting a decision made by ex-maintainer.

Cheers,
Leo


--

--
Kaushal Modi

--001a113dd64a38e273053708c8ad--