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 0161c9d 1/2: Load all generic-x.el modes unconditionally Date: Thu, 11 Feb 2021 10:07:29 -0500 Message-ID: References: <20210209160550.18823.10795@vcs0.savannah.gnu.org> <20210209160551.832FB20AD1@vcs0.savannah.gnu.org> <87o8gti2ln.fsf@gnus.org> <83sg65jffx.fsf@gnu.org> <83im71j96z.fsf@gnu.org> <83czx8k3gn.fsf@gnu.org> <83sg64hqzj.fsf@gnu.org> <83im6zj1bo.fsf@gnu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="38218"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/28.0.50 (gnu/linux) Cc: Eli Zaretskii , larsi@gnus.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Stefan Kangas Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Thu Feb 11 16:08:13 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 1lADZk-0009mQ-Cz for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Thu, 11 Feb 2021 16:08:12 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:46794 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lADZj-0005YC-FB for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Thu, 11 Feb 2021 10:08:11 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:42344) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lADZ9-000576-On for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 11 Feb 2021 10:07:35 -0500 Original-Received: from mailscanner.iro.umontreal.ca ([132.204.25.50]:20440) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lADZ7-0005Xk-8a; Thu, 11 Feb 2021 10:07:34 -0500 Original-Received: from pmg3.iro.umontreal.ca (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pmg3.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 96B57440A47; Thu, 11 Feb 2021 10:07:31 -0500 (EST) Original-Received: from mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (unknown [172.31.2.1]) by pmg3.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 5430F440BF0; Thu, 11 Feb 2021 10:07:30 -0500 (EST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=iro.umontreal.ca; s=mail; t=1613056050; bh=+/25FoNCjBeXnOB+q7FXgHRZZegIHuJxcMIytDffZY8=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:References:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=SU1JXj665ouz0Zg6o59SrwDyZhdz/5Jl1zHCP4EnGXQDv99YpFljilA2pt02ho+PQ HcuspJbFDiRhydaOVlpHv/XhghZgB/lWdGMI/fQ40q843bimOkcZQcTnSGoiQsTQqi 9yHAfUWBLsedSOY6dXbWrXlFD8c22DRbdYPbwCbpJTAcjLE734kj90RNVoBIQCijy/ AHM35Upe73ngiWPYtfG0BRf2R4Sz+npTM9oJH7yjXNKx6CAxD+WlqeK+EsZb4OEB4Y PAsPIBIZCYXfesBtJnmDXtpoDvvfhpQC99MHFDHqdYLeFAN6h+nw6pq+shLTImltnK GHZOe1W1AMlDg== Original-Received: from alfajor (unknown [216.154.41.47]) by mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id E672D1203CF; Thu, 11 Feb 2021 10:07:29 -0500 (EST) In-Reply-To: (Stefan Kangas's message of "Thu, 11 Feb 2021 08:38:31 -0600") 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 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:264391 Archived-At: > They may not be very impressive, but surely they are better than > nothing. If they are not better than nothing, they should probably > better be removed. > What am I missing? I see two risks, really: 1- some of the regexps used may overlap with some pre-existing entries on the default `auto-mode-alist`. I don't know that it's the case, but I think there are enough regexps in `generic-x` and on `auto-mode-alist` to make such an overlap possible if not likely. 2- They're only added to `auto-mode-alist` when `generic-x` is loaded, which may be too late: they may end up hiding entries added by user-installed ELPA packages or by some other part of the user's init file. So, maybe a better solution is to make sure the entries are added to the *end* of `auto-mode-alist`, which should make them harmless enough. Stefan PS: FWIW, in my case it would make them largely ineffective since I have: (setq auto-mode-alist (append auto-mode-alist '(("\\.[^/.]+\\'" ignore t))))