From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Stefan Monnier Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: master f0ff20be51: * src/emacs.c (main): Improve accuracy of daemon warning message on PGTK. Date: Thu, 07 Apr 2022 19:04:50 -0400 Message-ID: References: <164921225790.11115.15669298143254852205@vcs2.savannah.gnu.org> <20220406023058.315C7C009A8@vcs2.savannah.gnu.org> <87ilrm9qa7.fsf@athena.silentflame.com> <87ilrlzqgu.fsf@yahoo.com> <87y20hhg5b.fsf@athena.silentflame.com> <87tub5y5l8.fsf@yahoo.com> <87r169h31p.fsf@athena.silentflame.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="13278"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/29.0.50 (gnu/linux) Cc: Po Lu , emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Sean Whitton Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Fri Apr 08 01:06:21 2022 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 1ncbCm-0003Et-OA for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Fri, 08 Apr 2022 01:06:20 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:51362 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1ncbCl-000650-EI for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Thu, 07 Apr 2022 19:06:19 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:56968) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1ncbBS-0005KJ-JZ for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 07 Apr 2022 19:05:01 -0400 Original-Received: from mailscanner.iro.umontreal.ca ([132.204.25.50]:4799) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1ncbBP-0001bm-Ts for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 07 Apr 2022 19:04:57 -0400 Original-Received: from pmg3.iro.umontreal.ca (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pmg3.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 48B3E441158; Thu, 7 Apr 2022 19:04:54 -0400 (EDT) Original-Received: from mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (unknown [172.31.2.1]) by pmg3.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id CD8F9441150; Thu, 7 Apr 2022 19:04:52 -0400 (EDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=iro.umontreal.ca; s=mail; t=1649372692; bh=aA2xN//L9+ma6Ip8FhA5i7KDelgLblpdNDsXeXc49NU=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:References:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=Sguk/vOAsG5okAOTfJFROPmHurjZ+qIiKQD8CvxJF0XEN1c0GTvNLjES8prAmAhUS aaJEd113BGZDBtJMVUHBRgnNibqp8ck28MnKdi55REIilYfUSarCFGSkebiVCiOxog UIxblSp3+UbLtWU7KcppLVC0sLq4sBhPCCe8I6LdyMNqqPCMJPd0qFWoiCC4U2Sn8M zIyf+hkC7Slq3sF1kGfMl+ZByQAPVw75fKIymfUmMzs+G3gAPsDKo4avyMyNevFmi+ xN9SvrpsNveENMb25w5QSiMm4vgTYUxd2KINHDwdIYqQxBCXQTHQk3YmQYX8GjDnCy MIb4rdDIZqprg== Original-Received: from pastel (unknown [45.72.221.51]) by mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 9BF9A120198; Thu, 7 Apr 2022 19:04:52 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: <87r169h31p.fsf@athena.silentflame.com> (Sean Whitton's message of "Wed, 06 Apr 2022 22:32:02 -0700") Received-SPF: pass client-ip=132.204.25.50; envelope-from=monnier@iro.umontreal.ca; helo=mailscanner.iro.umontreal.ca X-Spam_score_int: -42 X-Spam_score: -4.3 X-Spam_bar: ---- X-Spam_report: (-4.3 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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:287907 Archived-At: >> Fundamental to the implementation means that it can be fixed without >> changing the design of the API ;-) > I do see what you mean -- and please do suggest another word if you have > one in mind -- but in this case I am not sure the distinction between > fundamental-to-the-API and fundamental-to-the-implementation matters. Maybe "difficult to fix"? Stefan