Re: Real constants

[Juanma Barranquero <lekktu@gmail.com>]

On 7/14/05, Richard M. Stallman <rms@gnu.org> wrote:

> I don't want to introduce defining of "real constants" in Emacs.

That's your prerogative, of course.

> The motivation for the suggestion appears to be an idea of
> completeness.

No. It's not completeness, it's usefulness, even if you don't agree
(you were commenting about *my* motivations, after all :)

  - Most languages have true constants, even dynamic languages like
Perl (though in Perl they're really inlined functions). This case
(Perl) is particularly funny because it started without constants and
they were added afterwards when they were found lacking (and useful).

 - True constants can prevent some kinds of problems.

  - The Emacs code already uses true constants, like
`enable-multibyte-characters', and keywords. Was that for
completeness?

 - At least one developer (Stefan) has said he has true constants
added to his local Emacs. I'd assume he finds them useful.

> Please don't propose new Emacs features for mere completeness' sake.

Please don't assume you know people's motivations or needs.

-- 
                    /L/e/k/t/u