From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Thien-Thi Nguyen Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: fileio.c "#if 0" block Date: Sun, 06 Mar 2005 02:25:11 +0100 Message-ID: References: <01c521a7$Blat.v2.4$bf474060@zahav.net.il> Reply-To: ttn@glug.org NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1110072879 20894 80.91.229.2 (6 Mar 2005 01:34:39 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 6 Mar 2005 01:34:39 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sun Mar 06 02:34:39 2005 Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1D7kfA-00029l-3V for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 06 Mar 2005 02:34:32 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1D7kwx-0008FB-Uv for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 05 Mar 2005 20:52:55 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1D7kwN-0008AV-Nb for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 05 Mar 2005 20:52:19 -0500 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1D7kwB-00085c-VK for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 05 Mar 2005 20:52:09 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1D7kwA-00081G-Pu for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 05 Mar 2005 20:52:06 -0500 Original-Received: from [151.37.165.204] (helo=surf.glug.org) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1D7kRw-0005Dr-02; Sat, 05 Mar 2005 20:20:52 -0500 Original-Received: from ttn by surf.glug.org with local (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 1D7kW7-0005sw-00; Sun, 06 Mar 2005 02:25:11 +0100 Original-To: Eli Zaretskii In-reply-to: <01c521a7$Blat.v2.4$bf474060@zahav.net.il> (eliz@gnu.org) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org X-MailScanner-To: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:34235 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:34235 From: "Eli Zaretskii" Date: Sat, 05 Mar 2005 19:20:17 +0200 Given this very clear (IMHO) explanation, I don't understand your original gripe about it: [...] Can you explain what you meant by that, now that you know why the old code was left in the sources, rather than deleted? as part of the emacs under vms effort, i'm addressing some of the "subtle bugs" (that are related to vms) in Fexpand_file_name, by studying the current behavior, forming a mental model of the correct behavior and making the necessary changes. for completeness, i would prefer to apply these bugfixes to all instances of the bug that i can find, whether in one function or in many. i get the feeling that modifying the #if-0'ed out Fexpand_file_name, however, goes against the intent of preserving it in some kind of pristine form. i can see a value in leaving it completely untouched as a historical snapshot (certainly, it is less work to completely ignore it). my griping was an expression of inner conflict at allowing bit rot to flourish unchecked, and not completing the job in some sense. but having written this, i've overcome that internal conflict (laziness wins) -- i'll leave that code alone for someone else to munge, and work on something else. thi