From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Stefan Monnier Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: [PATCH] Raise an error when detecting old-style backquotes. Date: Sun, 08 Oct 2017 15:14:01 -0400 Message-ID: References: <46860d72-9c7e-2c80-5fe3-e17f5ccd6e2d@cs.ucla.edu> <20171003141708.24646-1-phst@google.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1507490157 20670 195.159.176.226 (8 Oct 2017 19:15:57 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 8 Oct 2017 19:15:57 +0000 (UTC) User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.0.50 (gnu/linux) To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sun Oct 08 21:15:50 2017 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1e1H3D-0003v7-0q for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 08 Oct 2017 21:15:47 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:54746 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1e1H3J-00039n-L0 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 08 Oct 2017 15:15:53 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:42704) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1e1H2m-00039e-0A for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 08 Oct 2017 15:15:20 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1e1H2i-0007Hy-Fa for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 08 Oct 2017 15:15:19 -0400 Original-Received: from [195.159.176.226] (port=56986 helo=blaine.gmane.org) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1e1H2h-0007Ha-W6 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 08 Oct 2017 15:15:16 -0400 Original-Received: from list by blaine.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1e1H2Y-0007QM-0I for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 08 Oct 2017 21:15:06 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ Original-Lines: 16 Original-X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org Cancel-Lock: sha1:EPoRbjHx5/Q8y9Dsg3VYrr4YRZI= X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] [fuzzy] X-Received-From: 195.159.176.226 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 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.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:219267 Archived-At: >> I don't think it'll make any real difference: in both cases the old code >> won't work anymore: I'm hard pressed to think of a scenario where the >> "subtle" behavior change is subtle enough not to be detected >> fairly quickly. > For example, code such as '(` foo) would change behavior. Whether a certain > list is nested or not is definitely subtle enough. But this is not a complete scenario. You'd need to give additional context: - why is there '(` foo) in the source code (it seems already contrived)? - How is the result used (it's important that the result be used in a way which works differently but without signaling an error in both cases)? Stefan