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] widen-limits c331b66: Implement buffer-widen-limits functionality Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2016 16:03:35 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: References: <20160322022539.16038.77264@vcs.savannah.gnu.org> <8737riqouj.fsf@gmail.com> <221845e0-b194-433e-bfbc-105272ae5752@default> <87twjyp21k.fsf@gmail.com> <56F242E0.7060004@online.de> <877fgtpfrw.fsf@gmail.com> <56F293E7.2000703@online.de> <87a8lpnusg.fsf@gmail.com> <83r3f12oo5.fsf@gnu.org> <56F2D156.9040401@online.de> <83k2kt2i51.fsf@gnu.org> <56F2E643.4060903@online.de> <592bbafa-76ae-49d9-b5cd-644b3619a0d8@default> <87poukn8pl.fsf@gmail.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1458774258 2745 80.91.229.3 (23 Mar 2016 23:04:18 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2016 23:04:18 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Eli Zaretskii , =?iso-8859-1?B?QW5kcmVhcyBS9mhsZXI=?= , emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Vitalie Spinu Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu Mar 24 00:04:06 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 1airor-0001Z1-C3 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 24 Mar 2016 00:04:05 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:46527 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1airoq-0000cC-P2 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 23 Mar 2016 19:04:04 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:54545) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1airob-0000c3-M2 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 23 Mar 2016 19:03:50 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1airoa-00083P-MN for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 23 Mar 2016 19:03:49 -0400 Original-Received: from aserp1040.oracle.com ([141.146.126.69]:23761) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1airoV-00082q-9O; Wed, 23 Mar 2016 19:03:43 -0400 Original-Received: from userv0022.oracle.com (userv0022.oracle.com [156.151.31.74]) by aserp1040.oracle.com (Sentrion-MTA-4.3.2/Sentrion-MTA-4.3.2) with ESMTP id u2NN3b4C019177 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Wed, 23 Mar 2016 23:03:38 GMT Original-Received: from aserv0121.oracle.com (aserv0121.oracle.com [141.146.126.235]) by userv0022.oracle.com (8.14.4/8.13.8) with ESMTP id u2NN3auJ013283 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Wed, 23 Mar 2016 23:03:37 GMT Original-Received: from abhmp0015.oracle.com (abhmp0015.oracle.com [141.146.116.21]) by aserv0121.oracle.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id u2NN3aMZ005252; Wed, 23 Mar 2016 23:03:36 GMT In-Reply-To: <87poukn8pl.fsf@gmail.com> X-Priority: 3 X-Mailer: Oracle Beehive Extensions for Outlook 2.0.1.9 (901082) [OL 12.0.6744.5000 (x86)] X-Source-IP: userv0022.oracle.com [156.151.31.74] X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.4.x-2.6.x [generic] X-Received-From: 141.146.126.69 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:202154 Archived-At: > > It looks like someone perhaps implemented something and just tossed > > some minimal doc into the manual, in the form of doc-string-like text > > for a couple functions. >=20 > The issue of prog-widen and prog-indentation-context was discussed > extensively in the thread that led to this diff. > https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel/2016-03/threads.html#008= 59 Maybe so. My comment was about the inadequate doc, which does not define or in any way explain "sub-mode", its relation to chunks of text within a "super-mode" etc. This stuff needs to be defined. Can sub-modes be nested (sub-sub-mode etc.= )? Etc. There is nothing clear about this stuff, based on the doc. And my comment was limited to the doc - it was not a comment about any mail thread= . > Too long to be read from scratch I suppose. My takeaway is that those > features are raw and simplistic and bring more complications than they=20 > solve. Hopefully there will be a common consensus to put those on hold > for now. I have no opinion on what should be done, other than that whatever is intended to be added as a feature should be presented and discussed here first (IMO). I asked for a mini-spec of the requirements, but have seen nothing - no reasonable description of the whole problem the feature is intended to address.