From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "Paul W. Rankin" via "Emacs development discussions." Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: master 2399541: Remove font-lock toggle from font-lock-update Date: Thu, 25 Mar 2021 03:43:56 +1000 Organization: By Dasein Message-ID: References: <20210324143048.23515.75257@vcs0.savannah.gnu.org> <20210324143050.40C6E20D10@vcs0.savannah.gnu.org> <8786a8e8fa731c1bd1ef@heytings.org> <87h7l0blrc.fsf@gnus.org> <87czvobksy.fsf@gnus.org> Reply-To: "Paul W. Rankin" Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="5493"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Purely Mail via Roundcube/1.4.10 Cc: Gregory Heytings , Stefan Monnier , emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Lars Ingebrigtsen Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Wed Mar 24 18:47:08 2021 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 1lP7b2-0001IL-QB for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Wed, 24 Mar 2021 18:47:08 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:56294 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lP7b1-00013k-NW for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Wed, 24 Mar 2021 13:47:07 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:33990) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lP7Yt-0008Os-7s for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 24 Mar 2021 13:44:55 -0400 Original-Received: from sendmail.purelymail.com ([34.202.193.197]:49950) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lP7Yc-0002cN-Vp for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 24 Mar 2021 13:44:54 -0400 DKIM-Signature: a=rsa-sha256; b=HSUkA9ICeTbqQrjdob+WmoMgLiHwhKT2hH1tOhsDbEqTs6z91Co6KQbMkeL1Q1dGfLIjWMl2lvg/gcaMO2zKiDlbubCkRjv+q5CNDKY33ISowMMRwc0iLnie5/RnVvrRlykD77/GsnelUhMWSpefwFl6AWdbJBNWjbWbn0fV8+3oVJ/fLWSFnifSN23KUiBN8dxjXLwz/Ogg1Z1Q09g1gvWrL2I3ReyVNQGiMwq4+zeYzHOTifCzR8yzl4P98wJ4FRBYie3+EDm4YgShH6Ga3kcwc6zZc8s9eUTzudmr2NZT8oGi8K7Y7Shgbv2MlmDIUWL5Q+nnMTwfHjKFczzo3w==; s=purelymail2; d=bydasein.com; v=1; bh=PVM8kOubRxi2ZrwhyBnjZk9sA3Jgy//iBv2lBsuixtA=; h=Received:From:To; DKIM-Signature: a=rsa-sha256; b=diU/04AiaXdsZusYjYoSoL/bTgRn0iKaWJBrZx48v/rg1e1zyhHuZN9ghlX0MJZURMqZNMCicTXANuhoJt/gL/r3n5DUh3eRwzQfAaJrSO9Wy2LEQdJN7JGadohlKsiP1+lmjt72SIH4fSgqDw8uV8bsNZO0o0iCY21iOjkk5pxDKYmULY6+0lZzYv1xuDYQ/lFgtHecmkP2dCrZRijMiDyz0BTcKIvKb/PpNYwYSh5vwgQ7jX9Su5N8ENK0mVcBYx2Xc6vlqj32wGEMJ3+Ft/vj0+lSDz5K/xA0Xll1Iad/xFkg2zlqk7sUhLQVgoXPEZGCxNb8UvVo7WJP5CYDFg==; s=purelymail2; d=purelymail.com; v=1; bh=PVM8kOubRxi2ZrwhyBnjZk9sA3Jgy//iBv2lBsuixtA=; h=Feedback-ID:Received:From:To; Feedback-ID: 791:353:null:purelymail X-Pm-Original-To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-Received: by ip-172-30-0-247.ec2.internal (JAMES SMTP Server ) with ESMTPA ID 112925731; Wed, 24 Mar 2021 17:43:56 +0000 (UTC) In-Reply-To: <87czvobksy.fsf@gnus.org> X-Sender: pwr@bydasein.com Received-SPF: pass client-ip=34.202.193.197; envelope-from=pwr@bydasein.com; helo=sendmail.purelymail.com X-Spam_score_int: -20 X-Spam_score: -2.1 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.1 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, 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:266974 Archived-At: On 2021-03-25 02:03, Lars Ingebrigtsen wrote: > So I've reverted Paul's change. > > I think the command can be improved, but pushing a change like this in > the middle of a discussion is not the way to do it. No worries. I thought of pushing a change as the nicer alternative to a revert. To be blunt, the code ought to be reverted (for the reasons already stated).