From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Stefan Monnier Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Specifiers Date: Fri, 30 May 2008 10:10:33 -0400 Message-ID: References: <5CB5F5E5-9239-40A8-A3B2-5F49B94E27B7@gmail.com> <85lk1ui3i0.fsf@lola.goethe.zz> <85od6oe4s3.fsf@lola.goethe.zz> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1212156699 26098 80.91.229.12 (30 May 2008 14:11:39 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 30 May 2008 14:11:39 +0000 (UTC) Cc: david.reitter@gmail.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org, rms@gnu.org, miles@gnu.org To: David Kastrup Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri May 30 16:12:19 2008 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1K25Kt-00008U-Eo for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 30 May 2008 16:12:03 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:35056 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1K25K7-0000dc-Nx for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 30 May 2008 10:11:15 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1K25Js-0000SE-9A for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 30 May 2008 10:11:00 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1K25Jr-0000Rl-JK for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 30 May 2008 10:10:59 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=33000 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1K25Jr-0000Rf-DC for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 30 May 2008 10:10:59 -0400 Original-Received: from 206-248-174-248.dsl.teksavvy.com ([206.248.174.248]:46607 helo=ceviche.home) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1K25Jc-0005x5-LL; Fri, 30 May 2008 10:10:44 -0400 Original-Received: by ceviche.home (Postfix, from userid 20848) id 8DDA3B41E2; Fri, 30 May 2008 10:10:33 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: <85od6oe4s3.fsf@lola.goethe.zz> (David Kastrup's message of "Fri, 30 May 2008 07:31:56 +0200") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.0.60 (gnu/linux) X-detected-kernel: by monty-python.gnu.org: Linux 2.6 (newer, 3) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:98067 Archived-At: >> Yes, pretty much, except we don't have to worry about combinations of >> buffer-local with other forms of foo-local at the same time (well, >> supposedly we have to worry about it for buffer-local + frame-local, >> but we already know we don't handle that correctly). > That's supposed to be an advantage? What does "That" refer to? Not having to worry about combinations is an advantage, yes. > I don't quite see what handling independent heaps of complexity for the > three kinds of locality we currently support (and window-locality is > about to come, too, even though for faces, _another_ complexity source > handled independently at the moment) is supposed to be buying us. Ever heard of "divide and conquer"? In any case, try to write the code, and you'll quickly see what it is buying us. Stefan