From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Drew Adams Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: RE: [Emacs-diffs] emacs-25 a9c48d5: Additional fixes for file notification Date: Mon, 29 Feb 2016 10:11:10 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: References: <20160222175244.30186.2617@vcs.savannah.gnu.org> <87k2lwv5ob.fsf@gmx.de> <87egc4v4hs.fsf@gmx.de> <8bd4ec21-1306-41bf-aca7-5571a3014337@default> <87r3g4js64.fsf@gmail.com> <2b98a5dd-7f46-4e92-9398-ede070c261de@default> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1456769498 12678 80.91.229.3 (29 Feb 2016 18:11:38 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 29 Feb 2016 18:11:38 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Emacs developers , John Wiegley , Michael Albinus , Oleh Krehel , Kaushal Modi To: Stefan Monnier Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Feb 29 19:11:24 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 1aaSHz-0004ca-Og for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 29 Feb 2016 19:11:23 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:38238 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aaSHy-0004PN-V1 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 29 Feb 2016 13:11:22 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:52284) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aaSHv-0004P8-Bd for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 29 Feb 2016 13:11:20 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aaSHr-0000VJ-7d for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 29 Feb 2016 13:11:19 -0500 Original-Received: from userp1040.oracle.com ([156.151.31.81]:26815) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aaSHr-0000VC-02; Mon, 29 Feb 2016 13:11:15 -0500 Original-Received: from userv0021.oracle.com (userv0021.oracle.com [156.151.31.71]) by userp1040.oracle.com (Sentrion-MTA-4.3.2/Sentrion-MTA-4.3.2) with ESMTP id u1TIBCOI029094 (version=TLSv1 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Mon, 29 Feb 2016 18:11:12 GMT Original-Received: from aserv0121.oracle.com (aserv0121.oracle.com [141.146.126.235]) by userv0021.oracle.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id u1TIBBjY023772 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Mon, 29 Feb 2016 18:11:12 GMT Original-Received: from abhmp0012.oracle.com (abhmp0012.oracle.com [141.146.116.18]) by aserv0121.oracle.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id u1TIBBBn007462; Mon, 29 Feb 2016 18:11:11 GMT In-Reply-To: X-Priority: 3 X-Mailer: Oracle Beehive Extensions for Outlook 2.0.1.9 (901082) [OL 12.0.6691.5000 (x86)] X-Source-IP: userv0021.oracle.com [156.151.31.71] X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.4.x-2.6.x [generic] X-Received-From: 156.151.31.81 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:200819 Archived-At: > > Finally, to make things even more muddy, we have recently piled > > additional, non-Common Lisp stuff into the `cl-' namespace. > > What's that about? That just confuses people. > [...] > > This particular problem was reported as bug #20056, which was > > just closed today as "wont-fix". >=20 > You make it sound like we have many such additions, but I've only > heard of one such so far (namely (cl-)letf). In the specific case > of cl-letf, Sorry if I did. I don't know how many there are. If there is only one, so much the better - easy to fix. And again, it is more important for the future than for the past. No exceptions and a clear policy will help keep the CL libraries for Common Lisp emulation. Put differently, I see no good reason why something like `cl-letf' would be defined in a Common-Lisp emulation library. `letf' is simply not Common Lisp. Oh, but wait - Browsing through just `cl-macs.el', which is where `cl-letf' is defined, and searching for just `defmacro', I come across these non Common-Lisp macros (which are not just implementation building blocks): `cl-callf' `cl-callf2' `cl-iter-defun' `cl-flet*' `cl-letf*' Moving to `cl-extra' and searching for `defun', I see these: `cl-prettyprint' (called a "debugging aid") `cl-prettyexpand' (called a "debugging aid") `cl-describe-type' Moving to `cl-preloaded.el': `cl-struct-define' And there are other `cl*.el' libraries which could be checked. And it seems that there are internal functions and macros, which are used only for implementing CL things, which use prefix `cl-' instead of `cl--'. For example, `cl-struct-define'. Should they not be renamed? So it seems that there at least a few more than just `cl-letf'. > I'm not sure where else you'd want to put it [`cl-letf'] Doesn't matter to me. Typically, something as general as that would go in a library such as `subr.el' or `simple.el', I would think. But I'm no expert on the collection of Lisp libraries we have. > (I don't want it as just unprefixed `letf'). Why not? But if there is a good reason for that, fine. I don't have a problem with putting it in a library that uses a prefix for everything - as long as the prefix is not `cl-'. I really don't see why `cl-' would not be reserved for emulation of Common Lisp constructs (and their implementations).