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: Emacs-devel Digest, Vol 204, Issue 28 Date: Sat, 27 Feb 2021 09:50:39 -0500 Message-ID: References: <8335xiosc1.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="14936"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/28.0.50 (gnu/linux) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org, stefankangas@gmail.com, Pedro Andres Aranda Gutierrez , juri@linkov.net To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Sat Feb 27 15:51:41 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 1lG0wX-0003mT-6V for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Sat, 27 Feb 2021 15:51:41 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:39352 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lG0wW-0007pu-9U for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Sat, 27 Feb 2021 09:51:40 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:58350) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lG0vg-0007Ov-S9 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 27 Feb 2021 09:50:50 -0500 Original-Received: from mailscanner.iro.umontreal.ca ([132.204.25.50]:16462) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lG0vb-0007vr-9g; Sat, 27 Feb 2021 09:50:47 -0500 Original-Received: from pmg3.iro.umontreal.ca (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pmg3.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id D9509441AFC; Sat, 27 Feb 2021 09:50:41 -0500 (EST) Original-Received: from mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (unknown [172.31.2.1]) by pmg3.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 870FE441AEB; Sat, 27 Feb 2021 09:50:40 -0500 (EST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=iro.umontreal.ca; s=mail; t=1614437440; bh=lPDxRf9Tu3w7UxSVm9NhwhP9nFxbu+ffWNiVit3v9wU=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:References:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=DtvGEXEIrwjTVgKMPIsTTXn8E+iUw7wy70E0AwmRR/wv8wMUGeYnyKS7EbW1Ohc3T KLrqQF29H+ddlCD80wWlodY5zlfnAO0s/gabJrZ8W0btNnepiN0dADOmZLF05XA54q 1XUyZJlKSL57/TvDzJKsQtKi4zpGlZiP8MswHjdrev0Wm23e4/I+2alW171dNgUTYo 39p1Ge4enaclSYcXN9amMVc3OaJrK6kXvUaCuhexGNfo2DVp756Zz5p9pARBz3RZv3 GBSdVwfEvsgv7Vos2GflIft9/YMPrOIGcJ5QJ+tTAhpGduNP/Aoo/RsCat8kt8xeYF 3+/dy3decvXKQ== Original-Received: from alfajor (unknown [216.154.41.47]) by mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 7468E12025D; Sat, 27 Feb 2021 09:50:40 -0500 (EST) In-Reply-To: <8335xiosc1.fsf@gnu.org> (Eli Zaretskii's message of "Sat, 27 Feb 2021 09:58:06 +0200") 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:265727 Archived-At: >> knowing in which context they are. So, those braces may be >> 'superfluous' from the language point of view but they don't harm the >> code and favour inclusiveness ;-) That's indeed a good point, thanks. > I removed those braces because they are against our coding style, not > because of my personal preferences. Looks like I need to go re-read our coding style ;-) I mean, I know that we don't need those braces here and I don't put them in the code I write (because they make my code too sparse for my taste), but I didn't know our style was *against* their presence (rather than merely allowing or even recommending their absence). Stefan