From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Gregory Heytings via "Emacs development discussions." Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: feature/icomplete-vertical Date: Mon, 05 Oct 2020 19:44:37 +0000 Message-ID: References: <838sd4z6lz.fsf@gnu.org> <20201001164804.mqqyxtet4ttweuyv@Ergus> <83blhhdy3w.fsf@gnu.org> <87d01xghmt.fsf@gmail.com> <83sgatc8er.fsf@gnu.org> <83mu11c78j.fsf@gnu.org> <87tuv9eygk.fsf@gmail.com> <87imbogb6k.fsf@gmail.com> <83eemcdgg2.fsf@gnu.org> <83d01wdf8p.fsf@gnu.org> <838sckdby8.fsf@gnu.org> <87v9foeb8p.fsf@gmail.com> <83v9fobhmo.fsf@gnu.org> Reply-To: Gregory Heytings Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=US-ASCII Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="39697"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Alpine 2.22 (NEB 394 2020-01-19) Cc: =?ISO-8859-15?Q?Jo=E3o_T=E1vora?= , spacibba@aol.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org, casouri@gmail.com, juri@linkov.net To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Mon Oct 05 21:46:03 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 1kPWQs-000ACY-LI for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Mon, 05 Oct 2020 21:46:02 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:55028 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kPWQr-0004a3-NZ for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Mon, 05 Oct 2020 15:46:01 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:55022) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kPWPn-0003l6-QQ for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 05 Oct 2020 15:44:56 -0400 Original-Received: from mx.sdf.org ([205.166.94.24]:55436) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kPWPk-00068W-QX; Mon, 05 Oct 2020 15:44:55 -0400 Original-Received: from sdf.org (IDENT:ghe@otaku.sdf.org [205.166.94.8]) by mx.sdf.org (8.15.2/8.14.5) with ESMTPS id 095JieJO022182 (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256 bits) verified NO); Mon, 5 Oct 2020 19:44:40 GMT Original-Received: (from ghe@localhost) by sdf.org (8.15.2/8.12.8/Submit) id 095Jj1jP002653; Mon, 5 Oct 2020 19:45:01 GMT In-Reply-To: <83v9fobhmo.fsf@gnu.org> Received-SPF: pass client-ip=205.166.94.24; envelope-from=ghe@sdf.org; helo=mx.sdf.org X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: First seen = 2020/10/05 14:24:12 X-ACL-Warn: Detected OS = ??? X-Spam_score_int: -18 X-Spam_score: -1.9 X-Spam_bar: - X-Spam_report: (-1.9 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no 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:257147 Archived-At: >>> I'm not sure what detail I need to provide. Isn't it clear that using >>> a buffer-local variable doesn't resolve problems with using that same >>> buffer in another level of recursive-edit? Or that changing the >>> window-start position from under the feet of the display engine is >>> something that should be avoided? Why would you need examples to >>> realize that a design based on this cannot be clean, in the sense that >>> use cases where it causes trouble will eventually surface? >> >> I think can understand some of Gregory's frustration. If those >> problems are real, it should be possible to showcase them. > > The second one was showcased by Gregory himself. > It's unbelievable you dare to write such a sentence, and from my point of view makes it clear how hard it is to have a discussion with you. For those who are not aware of the context: - I explained (to Stefan) what a part of my code did, and said "it does this because otherwise point could become invisible during a second or two" - Eli jumps in the conversation and says "no, that's not possible, point can never become invisible, if it does it's a bug, please tell me how this can happen" - I write a recipe to demonstrate how this can happen - Eli replies that, even though point becomes invisible with the recipe, this is after all not a bug, and that the bug is in the recipe - Eli now uses the recipe I sent him as an argument to explain that my code, in which I (obviously) do not do what I did in the recipe, can cause "potential problems" How could anyone remain calm with this? I can't.